Ryzen 9 3900X vs Celeron N3350

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron N3350
2016
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
0.72
Ryzen 9 3900X
2019
12 cores / 24 threads, 125 Watt
21.11
+2832%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Celeron N3350 by a whopping 2832% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N3350 and Ryzen 9 3900X processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking2597238
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data33.80
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD Ryzen 9
Architecture codenameApollo Lake (2016)Matisse (Zen 2) (2019−2020)
Release date1 September 2016 (7 years ago)7 July 2019 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$24$499
Current price$251 (10.5x MSRP)$403 (0.8x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron N3350 and Ryzen 9 3900X 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)12 (Dodeca-Core)
Threads224
Base clock speed1.1 GHz3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz4.6 GHz
L1 cacheno data96K (per core)
L2 cache2 MB512K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB64 MB
Chip lithography14 nm7 nm
Maximum core temperature105 °C95 °C
Number of transistorsno data19,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierNoYes

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N3350 and Ryzen 9 3900X 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 configuration11 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFCBGA1296AM4
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N3350 and Ryzen 9 3900X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
AVXno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+no data
SIPP-no data
Smart Response-no data
GPIO+no data
Smart Connect-no data
StatusLaunchedno data
HD Audio+no data
RST-no data

Security technologies

Celeron N3350 and Ryzen 9 3900X technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data
Secure Boot+no data
Secure Key+no data
MPX+no data
Identity Protection+no data
OS Guard+no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N3350 and Ryzen 9 3900X are enumerated here.

AMD-Vno data+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
VT-i-no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N3350 and Ryzen 9 3900X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR4 Dual-channel
Maximum memory size8 GB128 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidthno data51.196 GB/s
ECC memory support--

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics 500-
Max video memory8 GB-
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video+-
Clear Video HD+-
Graphics max frequency650 MHz-
Execution Units12-
InTru 3D--

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N3350 and Ryzen 9 3900X integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3-
eDP+-
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
MIPI-DSI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron N3350 and Ryzen 9 3900X integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX+-
OpenGL+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N3350 and Ryzen 9 3900X.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes6no data
USB revision2.0/3.0no data
Total number of SATA ports2no data
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports2no data
Number of USB ports8no data
Integrated LAN-no data
UART+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.

Celeron N3350 0.72
Ryzen 9 3900X 21.11
+2832%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Celeron N3350 by 2832% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

Celeron N3350 1107
Ryzen 9 3900X 32647
+2849%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Celeron N3350 by 2849% in Passmark.

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Celeron N3350 253
Ryzen 9 3900X 1694
+570%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Celeron N3350 by 570% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

Celeron N3350 416
Ryzen 9 3900X 9923
+2285%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Celeron N3350 by 2285% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

Celeron N3350 1490
Ryzen 9 3900X 6019
+304%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Celeron N3350 by 304% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Celeron N3350 2654
Ryzen 9 3900X 45539
+1616%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Celeron N3350 by 1616% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Celeron N3350 1655
Ryzen 9 3900X 14889
+800%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Celeron N3350 by 800% in 3DMark06 CPU.

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

Celeron N3350 45.5
Ryzen 9 3900X 2.69
+1591%

Celeron N3350 outperforms Ryzen 9 3900X by 1591% in wPrime 32.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

Celeron N3350 1
Ryzen 9 3900X 34
+2952%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Celeron N3350 by 2952% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Celeron N3350 85
Ryzen 9 3900X 3049
+3487%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Celeron N3350 by 3487% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Celeron N3350 46
Ryzen 9 3900X 207
+350%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Celeron N3350 by 350% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

Celeron N3350 0.59
Ryzen 9 3900X 2.36
+300%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Celeron N3350 by 300% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron N3350 0.7
Ryzen 9 3900X 10.8
+1554%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Celeron N3350 by 1554% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron N3350 616
Ryzen 9 3900X 7534
+1123%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Celeron N3350 by 1123% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron N3350 6
Ryzen 9 3900X 147
+2271%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Celeron N3350 by 2271% in x264 encoding pass 2.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron N3350 33
Ryzen 9 3900X 268
+723%

Ryzen 9 3900X outperforms Celeron N3350 by 723% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.72 21.11
Recency 1 September 2016 7 July 2019
Physical cores 2 12
Threads 2 24
Cost $24 $499
Chip lithography 14 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 125 Watt

The Ryzen 9 3900X is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N3350 in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron N3350 is a notebook processor while Ryzen 9 3900X is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N3350 and Ryzen 9 3900X, 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 N3350
Celeron N3350
AMD Ryzen 9 3900X
Ryzen 9 3900X

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.


2.8 902 votes

Rate Celeron N3350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.7 5029 votes

Rate Ryzen 9 3900X on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N3350 or Ryzen 9 3900X, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.