Celeron G3900 vs A10-7800

VS

Aggregate performance score

A10-7800
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
2.02
+49.6%
Celeron G3900
2015
2 cores / 2 threads, 51 Watt
1.35

A10-7800 outperforms Celeron G3900 by an impressive 50% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A10-7800 and Celeron G3900 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking19272255
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.18
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Seriesno dataIntel Celeron
Power efficiency2.942.51
Architecture codenameKaveri (2014−2015)Skylake (2015−2016)
Release date31 July 2014 (10 years ago)1 September 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$42

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

A10-7800 and Celeron G3900 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed3.5 GHz2.8 GHz
Boost clock speed3.9 GHz2.8 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 3.0
Bus rateno data4 × 8 GT/s
Multiplierno data28
L1 cache256 KB64 KB (per core)
L2 cache4096 KB256 KB (per core)
L3 cacheno data4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm14 nm
Die size245 mm2150 mm2
Maximum core temperature71 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °C65 °C
Number of transistors2,411 million1,400 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibilityno data-

Compatibility

Information on A10-7800 and Celeron G3900 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFM2+FCLGA1151
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt51 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A10-7800 and Celeron G3900. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI++
FMA+-
AVX++
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-
DualGraphics+-
TrueAudio+-
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
Out-of-band client management+-
VirusProtect+-
HSA+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+

Security technologies

A10-7800 and Celeron G3900 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® ME
OS Guardno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A10-7800 and Celeron G3900 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+
IOMMU 2.0+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-7800 and Celeron G3900. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-2133DDR3, DDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data64 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidthno data34.134 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R7 GraphicsIntel HD Graphics 510
iGPU core count8no data
จำนวนพาธไลน์512no data
Max video memoryno data64 GB
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HDno data+
Enduro+-
Switchable graphics+-
UVD+-
VCE+-
Graphics max frequencyno data950 MHz
InTru 3Dno data+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A10-7800 and Celeron G3900 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
DVIno data+

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by A10-7800 and Celeron G3900 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution supportno data+
Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096x2304@24Hz
Max resolution over eDPno data4096x2304@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data4096x2304@60Hz
Max resolution over VGAno dataN/A

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A10-7800 and Celeron G3900 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 1212
OpenGLno data4.4
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A10-7800 and Celeron G3900.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes1616

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.

A10-7800 2.02
+49.6%
Celeron G3900 1.35

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.

A10-7800 3210
+49.4%
Celeron G3900 2148

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.

A10-7800 433
Celeron G3900 584
+34.9%

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.

A10-7800 1080
+8.1%
Celeron G3900 999

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.02 1.35
Recency 31 July 2014 1 September 2015
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 51 Watt

A10-7800 has a 49.6% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Celeron G3900, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 27.5% lower power consumption.

The A10-7800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron G3900 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A10-7800 and Celeron G3900, 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 A10-7800
A10-7800
Intel Celeron G3900
Celeron G3900

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.


3.7 305 votes

Rate A10-7800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 225 votes

Rate Celeron G3900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A10-7800 or Celeron G3900, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.