Celeron G3900TE vs Atom x7-E3950
Aggregated performance score
Atom x7-E3950 outperforms Celeron G3900TE by a minimal 1% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron G3900TE processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2227 | 2231 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 1.35 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | 7x Intel Atom | Intel Celeron |
| Architecture codename | Apollo Lake (2016) | Skylake (2015−2016) |
| Release date | 30 August 2014 (9 years ago) | 19 October 2015 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $57 | $42 |
| Current price | $377 (6.6x MSRP) | $42 (1x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron G3900TE 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 cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 1.6 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2 GHz | 2.3 GHz |
| Bus support | no data | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| L1 cache | 56K (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 2 MB (shared) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 2 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | no data | 98.57 mm210.3 mm × 9.57 mm |
| Maximum core temperature | 110 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 103 °C | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron G3900TE 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 configuration | 1 (Uniprocessor) | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | Intel BGA 1296 | LGA-1151 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 12 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron G3900TE. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
Security technologies
Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron G3900TE technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron G3900TE are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron G3900TE. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3, DDR4 | DDR3L-1600 |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 34.134 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | no data | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel HD Graphics 505 | Intel HD Graphics 510 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron G3900TE.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 4 | 16 |
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.
Atom x7-E3950 outperforms Celeron G3900TE by 1% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Atom x7-E3950 outperforms Celeron G3900TE by 1% in Passmark.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.21 | 1.20 |
| Integrated graphics card | 0.87 | 1.36 |
| Recency | 30 August 2014 | 19 October 2015 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Cost | $57 | $42 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 12 Watt | 35 Watt |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron G3900TE.
Should you still have questions on choice between Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron G3900TE, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
