Ryzen 5 8400F vs Celeron G3900TE

Aggregate performance score

Celeron G3900TE
2015
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
1.21
Ryzen 5 8400F
2024
6 cores / 12 threads, 65 Watt
15.59
+1188%

Ryzen 5 8400F outperforms Celeron G3900TE by a whopping 1188% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron G3900TE and Ryzen 5 8400F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2356465
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.3559.63
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Celeronno data
Power efficiency3.1521.87
Architecture codenameSkylake (2015−2016)Phoenix (2023−2024)
Release date19 October 2015 (9 years ago)1 April 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$42$170

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 5 8400F has 4317% better value for money than Celeron G3900TE.

Detailed specifications

Celeron G3900TE and Ryzen 5 8400F 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)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads212
Base clock speedno data4.2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.3 GHz4.7 GHz
Bus typeDMI 3.0no data
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier23no data
L1 cache128 KB64 KB (per core)
L2 cache512 KB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache2 MB16 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm4 nm
Die size98.57 mm2178 mm2
Number of transistorsno data25,000 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Celeron G3900TE and Ryzen 5 8400F 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
SocketLGA-1151AM5
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G3900TE and Ryzen 5 8400F. 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 G3900TE and Ryzen 5 8400F 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 G3900TE and Ryzen 5 8400F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3L-1600DDR5
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 cardIntel HD Graphics 510N/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G3900TE and Ryzen 5 8400F.

PCIe version3.04.0
PCI Express lanes1620

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 G3900TE 1.21
Ryzen 5 8400F 15.59
+1188%

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 G3900TE 1850
Ryzen 5 8400F 23852
+1189%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.21 15.59
Recency 19 October 2015 1 April 2024
Physical cores 2 6
Threads 2 12
Chip lithography 14 nm 4 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 65 Watt

Celeron G3900TE has 85.7% lower power consumption.

Ryzen 5 8400F, on the other hand, has a 1188.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, 200% more physical cores and 500% more threads, and a 250% more advanced lithography process.

The Ryzen 5 8400F is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron G3900TE in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron G3900TE is a notebook processor while Ryzen 5 8400F is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G3900TE and Ryzen 5 8400F, 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 G3900TE
Celeron G3900TE
AMD Ryzen 5 8400F
Ryzen 5 8400F

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 2 votes

Rate Celeron G3900TE on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 162 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 8400F on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron G3900TE or Ryzen 5 8400F, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.