E2-9000 vs Celeron G3900E

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron G3900E
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
1.33
+111%

Celeron G3900E outperforms E2-9000 by a whopping 111% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron G3900E and E2-9000 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22722780
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.13no data
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronBristol Ridge
Power efficiency3.475.74
Architecture codenameSkylake (2015−2016)Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date2 January 2016 (8 years ago)1 June 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron G3900E and E2-9000 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speedno data1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz2.2 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier24no data
L1 cache128 KBno data
L2 cache512 KB1 MB
L3 cache2 MBno data
Chip lithography14 nm28 nm
Die size98.57 mm2124.5 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Number of transistors1750 Million1200 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron G3900E and E2-9000 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)no data
Socketno dataBGA
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt10 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G3900E and E2-9000. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataVirtualization,
AES-NI+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G3900E and E2-9000 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron G3900E and E2-9000. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesLPDDR3-1866DDR4
Maximum memory size64 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth34.134 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 510AMD Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G3900E and E2-9000.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes16no 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.

Celeron G3900E 1.33
+111%
E2-9000 0.63

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.

Celeron G3900E 2034
+110%
E2-9000 967

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.33 0.63
Integrated graphics card 1.61 1.03
Recency 2 January 2016 1 June 2016
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 10 Watt

Celeron G3900E has a 111.1% higher aggregate performance score, 56.3% faster integrated GPU, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

E2-9000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 months, and 250% lower power consumption.

The Celeron G3900E is our recommended choice as it beats the E2-9000 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G3900E and E2-9000, 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.


Intel Celeron G3900E
Celeron G3900E
AMD E2-9000
E2-9000

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.


2 1 vote

Rate Celeron G3900E on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.5 311 votes

Rate E2-9000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron G3900E or E2-9000, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.