Celeron N4020 vs Ryzen 9 3900

VS

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 9 3900
2019
12 cores / 24 threads, 65 Watt
19.39
+1899%
Celeron N4020
2019
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
0.97

Ryzen 9 3900 outperforms Celeron N4020 by a whopping 1899% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 9 3900 and Celeron N4020 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2902478
Place by popularitynot in top-10083
Cost-effectiveness evaluation20.03no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesAMD Matisse (Ryzen 3000 Desktop)Intel Gemini Lake
Power efficiency28.2315.30
Architecture codenameMatisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)Gemini Lake Refresh (2019)
Release date24 September 2019 (5 years ago)4 November 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$499no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 9 3900 and Celeron N4020 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores12 (Dodeca-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads242
Base clock speed3.1 GHz1.1 GHz
Boost clock speed4.3 GHz2.8 GHz
Bus rateno data15 MHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache512 KB (per core)4 MB
L3 cache64 MB4 MB
Chip lithography7 nm, 12 nm14 nm
Die size2x 74 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Number of transistors7,600 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 9 3900 and Celeron N4020 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11
SocketAM4FCBGA1090
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 9 3900 and Celeron N4020. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions86x MMX(+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A,-64, AMD-V, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHA, Precision Boost 2Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI++
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Smart Responseno data-
GPIOno data+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data-
Precision Boost 2+no data

Security technologies

Ryzen 9 3900 and Celeron N4020 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
MPX-+
Identity Protection-+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® ME
OS Guardno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 9 3900 and Celeron N4020 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 9 3900 and Celeron N4020. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-3200DDR4
Maximum memory size128 GB8 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth51.196 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardN/AIntel UHD Graphics 600
Max video memoryno data8 GB
Quick Sync Video-+
Graphics max frequencyno data650 MHz
Execution Unitsno data12

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Ryzen 9 3900 and Celeron N4020 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
MIPI-DSIno data+

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Ryzen 9 3900 and Celeron N4020 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution supportno data+
Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096x2160@30Hz
Max resolution over eDPno data4096x2160@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data4096x2160@60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Ryzen 9 3900 and Celeron N4020 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12
OpenGLno data4.4

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 9 3900 and Celeron N4020.

PCIe version4.02.0
PCI Express lanes246
USB revisionno data2.0/3.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data8
Integrated LANno data-
UARTno data+

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Ryzen 9 3900 19.39
+1899%
Celeron N4020 0.97

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Ryzen 9 3900 30804
+1890%
Celeron N4020 1548

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Ryzen 9 3900 1680
+390%
Celeron N4020 343

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Ryzen 9 3900 9555
+1647%
Celeron N4020 547

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Ryzen 9 3900 5700
+161%
Celeron N4020 2184

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Ryzen 9 3900 44191
+898%
Celeron N4020 4427

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Ryzen 9 3900 13817
+454%
Celeron N4020 2495

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Ryzen 9 3900 31
+1711%
Celeron N4020 2

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Ryzen 9 3900 2804
+2106%
Celeron N4020 127

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Ryzen 9 3900 197
+167%
Celeron N4020 74

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Ryzen 9 3900 2.22
+136%
Celeron N4020 0.94

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Ryzen 9 3900 10.4
+995%
Celeron N4020 1

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Ryzen 9 3900 132
+1223%
Celeron N4020 10

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Ryzen 9 3900 256
+410%
Celeron N4020 50

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Ryzen 9 3900 7145
+833%
Celeron N4020 766

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

Ryzen 9 3900 10190
+1119%
Celeron N4020 836

Blender(-)

Ryzen 9 3900 179
Celeron N4020 4064
+2170%

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

Ryzen 9 3900 1246
+170%
Celeron N4020 462

7-Zip Single

Ryzen 9 3900 5134
+109%
Celeron N4020 2456

7-Zip

Ryzen 9 3900 75612
+1581%
Celeron N4020 4498

WebXPRT 3

Ryzen 9 3900 227
+183%
Celeron N4020 80

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 19.39 0.97
Recency 24 September 2019 4 November 2019
Physical cores 12 2
Threads 24 2
Chip lithography 7 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 6 Watt

Ryzen 9 3900 has a 1899% higher aggregate performance score, 500% more physical cores and 1100% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron N4020, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 month, and 983.3% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen 9 3900 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N4020 in performance tests.

Note that Ryzen 9 3900 is a desktop processor while Celeron N4020 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 9 3900 and Celeron N4020, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD Ryzen 9 3900
Ryzen 9 3900
Intel Celeron N4020
Celeron N4020

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


4.6 623 votes

Rate Ryzen 9 3900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 1772 votes

Rate Celeron N4020 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 9 3900 or Celeron N4020, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.