C-30 vs Celeron G3930
Primary details
Comparing Celeron G3930 and C-30 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2193 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.69 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron | AMD C-Series |
| Power efficiency | 2.63 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Kaby Lake (2016−2019) | Ontario (2011−2012) |
| Release date | 3 January 2017 (7 years ago) | 4 January 2011 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $42 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Celeron G3930 and C-30 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 2.9 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2.9 GHz | 1.2 GHz |
| Bus type | DMI 3.0 | no data |
| Bus rate | 8 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 29 | no data |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 64 KB |
| L2 cache | 256K (per core) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 2 MB (shared) | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Die size | no data | 75 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 65 °C | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron G3930 and C-30 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 |
| Socket | FCLGA1151 | FT1 BGA 413-Ball |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 51 Watt | 9 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G3930 and C-30. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2 | 40 nm, 1.24-1.35V |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
Security technologies
Celeron G3930 and C-30 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
| Secure Key | + | no data |
| MPX | + | - |
| Identity Protection | + | - |
| SGX | Yes with Intel® ME | no data |
| OS Guard | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G3930 and C-30 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron G3930 and C-30. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 2133, DDR3L 1333/1600 | DDR3 Single-channel |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 38.397 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel HD Graphics 610 | AMD Radeon HD 6250 |
| Max video memory | 64 GB | no data |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Clear Video | + | no data |
| Clear Video HD | + | no data |
| Graphics max frequency | 1.05 GHz | no data |
| InTru 3D | + | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron G3930 and C-30 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 3 | no data |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron G3930 and C-30 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | + | no data |
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | 4096x2304@24Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over eDP | 4096x2304@60Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | 4096x2304@60Hz | no data |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Celeron G3930 and C-30 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | 12 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.4 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G3930 and C-30.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | no 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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 3 January 2017 | 4 January 2011 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 51 Watt | 9 Watt |
Celeron G3930 has an age advantage of 5 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 185.7% more advanced lithography process.
C-30, on the other hand, has 466.7% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Celeron G3930 and C-30. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Celeron G3930 is a desktop processor while C-30 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G3930 and C-30, 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.
