Apple M4 Max (14 cores) vs Celeron G3900E
Aggregate performance score
Apple M4 Max (14 cores) outperforms Celeron G3900E by a whopping 3264% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
Place in the ranking | 2401 | 64 |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.18 | no data |
Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
Series | Intel Celeron | Apple M4 |
Power efficiency | 3.48 | 51.15 |
Designer | Intel | Apple |
Architecture codename | Skylake (2015−2016) | no data |
Release date | 2 January 2016 (9 years ago) | 30 November 2024 (less than a year ago) |
Launch price (MSRP) | $107 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Celeron G3900E and M4 Max (14 cores) 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 14 (Tetradeca-Core) |
Threads | 2 | 14 |
Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 4.51 GHz |
Bus type | DMI 3.0 | no data |
Bus rate | 4 × 8 GT/s | no data |
Multiplier | 24 | no data |
L1 cache | 128 KB | no data |
L2 cache | 512 KB | no data |
L3 cache | 2 MB | no data |
Chip lithography | 14 nm | 3 nm |
Die size | 98.57 mm2 | no data |
Number of transistors | 1750 Million | no data |
64 bit support | + | + |
Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron G3900E and M4 Max (14 cores) 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) | no data |
Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 80 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G3900E and M4 Max (14 cores). You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
AES-NI | + | - |
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G3900E and M4 Max (14 cores) are enumerated here.
VT-d | + | no data |
VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron G3900E and M4 Max (14 cores). Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
Supported memory types | LPDDR3-1866 | no data |
Maximum memory size | 64 GB | no data |
Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
Maximum memory bandwidth | 34.134 GB/s | no data |
ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
Integrated graphics card | Intel HD Graphics 510 | Apple M4 32-core GPU |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G3900E and M4 Max (14 cores).
PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
PCI Express lanes | 16 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
Performance score | 1.27 | 42.72 |
Recency | 2 January 2016 | 30 November 2024 |
Physical cores | 2 | 14 |
Threads | 2 | 14 |
Chip lithography | 14 nm | 3 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 80 Watt |
Celeron G3900E has 128.6% lower power consumption.
Apple M4 Max (14 cores), on the other hand, has a 3263.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, 600% more physical cores and 600% more threads, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.
The Apple M4 Max (14 cores) is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron G3900E in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.