EPYC 4124P vs Celeron G3900E

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron G3900E
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
1.28
EPYC 4124P
2024
4 cores / 8 threads, 65 Watt
11.73
+816%

EPYC 4124P outperforms Celeron G3900E by a whopping 816% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron G3900E and EPYC 4124P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2291667
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.1852.71
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesIntel Celeronno data
Power efficiency3.4617.07
Architecture codenameSkylake (2015−2016)Raphael (2023−2024)
Release date2 January 2016 (8 years ago)21 May 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107$149

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

EPYC 4124P has 29183% better value for money than Celeron G3900E.

Detailed specifications

Celeron G3900E and EPYC 4124P 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads28
Base clock speedno data3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz5.1 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier24no data
L1 cache128 KB64 KB (per core)
L2 cache512 KB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache2 MB32 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm5 nm
Die size98.57 mm271 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data61 °C
Number of transistors1750 Million6,570 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron G3900E and EPYC 4124P 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)1
Socketno dataAM5
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G3900E and EPYC 4124P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G3900E and EPYC 4124P 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 EPYC 4124P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesLPDDR3-1866DDR5
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 Graphics

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G3900E and EPYC 4124P.

PCIe version3.05.0
PCI Express lanes1628

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 1.28
EPYC 4124P 11.73
+816%

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
EPYC 4124P 18637
+816%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.28 11.73
Integrated graphics card 1.61 1.98
Recency 2 January 2016 21 May 2024
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 8
Chip lithography 14 nm 5 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 65 Watt

Celeron G3900E has 85.7% lower power consumption.

EPYC 4124P, on the other hand, has a 816.4% higher aggregate performance score, 23% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 8 years, 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.

The EPYC 4124P is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron G3900E in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron G3900E is a notebook processor while EPYC 4124P is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G3900E and EPYC 4124P, 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 EPYC 4124P
EPYC 4124P

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
5 1 vote

Rate EPYC 4124P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron G3900E or EPYC 4124P, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.