Celeron G3900 vs EPYC 8324P
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 8324P outperforms Celeron G3900 by a whopping 2558% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 151 | 2505 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 18.81 | 0.18 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | 7.63 | 1.01 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | TSMC | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Siena (2023−2024) | Skylake (2015−2016) |
| Release date | 18 September 2023 (2 years ago) | 1 September 2015 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $1,895 | $42 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
EPYC 8324P has 10350% better value for money than Celeron G3900.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
EPYC 8324P and Celeron G3900 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 | 32 (Dotriaconta-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 64 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.65 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 3.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 28 |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 256 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 128 MB (shared) | 4 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 4x 73 mm2 | 150 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 75 °C | 65 °C |
| Number of transistors | 35,500 million | 1,400 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on EPYC 8324P and Celeron G3900 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 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | SP6 | FCLGA1151 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 180 Watt | 51 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 8324P and Celeron G3900. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Security technologies
EPYC 8324P and Celeron G3900 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® ME |
| OS Guard | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 8324P and Celeron G3900 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 EPYC 8324P and Celeron G3900. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR3, DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 34.134 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | N/A | Intel HD Graphics 510 |
| Max video memory | no data | 64 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Clear Video | no data | + |
| Clear Video HD | no data | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 950 MHz |
| InTru 3D | no data | + |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of EPYC 8324P and Celeron G3900 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | - | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
| DVI | no data | + |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by EPYC 8324P and Celeron G3900 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | no data | + |
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | 4096x2304@24Hz |
| Max resolution over eDP | no data | 4096x2304@60Hz |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | no data | 4096x2304@60Hz |
| Max resolution over VGA | no data | N/A |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by EPYC 8324P and Celeron G3900 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 12 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.4 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 8324P and Celeron G3900.
| PCIe version | 5.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 96 | 16 |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 32.43 | 1.22 |
| Recency | 18 September 2023 | 1 September 2015 |
| Physical cores | 32 | 2 |
| Threads | 64 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 5 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 180 Watt | 51 Watt |
EPYC 8324P has a 2558.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, 1500% more physical cores and 3100% more threads, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron G3900, on the other hand, has 252.9% lower power consumption.
The AMD EPYC 8324P is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron G3900 in performance tests.
Be aware that EPYC 8324P is a server/workstation processor while Celeron G3900 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
