Celeron N6211 vs G3930
Aggregate performance score
Celeron G3930 outperforms Celeron N6211 by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron G3930 and Celeron N6211 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2192 | 2195 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.69 | 3.33 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | Intel Celeron | Elkhart Lake |
| Power efficiency | 2.63 | 20.53 |
| Architecture codename | Kaby Lake (2016−2019) | Elkhart Lake (2022) |
| Release date | 3 January 2017 (7 years ago) | 17 July 2022 (2 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $42 | $54 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Celeron N6211 has 383% better value for money than Celeron G3930.
Detailed specifications
Celeron G3930 and Celeron N6211 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.9 GHz | 1.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.9 GHz | 3 GHz |
| Bus type | DMI 3.0 | no data |
| Bus rate | 8 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 29 | no data |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 1.5 MB |
| L3 cache | 2 MB (shared) | no data |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 70 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 65 °C | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron G3930 and Celeron N6211 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 |
| Socket | FCLGA1151 | BGA1493 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 51 Watt | 6.5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G3930 and Celeron N6211. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
Security technologies
Celeron G3930 and Celeron N6211 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 Celeron N6211 are enumerated here.
| 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 Celeron N6211. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 2133, DDR3L 1333/1600 | DDR4 |
| 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 | Intel UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) |
| 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 Celeron N6211 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 3 | no data |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron G3930 and Celeron N6211 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 Celeron N6211 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 Celeron N6211.
| 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.
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.
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
| Performance score | 1.42 | 1.41 |
| Integrated graphics card | 1.85 | 1.39 |
| Recency | 3 January 2017 | 17 July 2022 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 51 Watt | 6 Watt |
Celeron G3930 has a 0.7% higher aggregate performance score, and 33.1% faster integrated GPU.
Celeron N6211, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 years, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 750% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Celeron G3930 and Celeron N6211.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G3930 and Celeron N6211, 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.
