Celeron G3900T vs Phenom II X4 830
Aggregated performance score
Celeron G3900T outperforms Phenom II X4 830 by 2% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary Details
Comparing Phenom II X4 830 and Celeron G3900T processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2133 | 2117 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation | 2.15 | 0.84 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Architecture codename | Deneb (2009−2011) | Skylake (2015−2016) |
| Release date | September 2009 (14 years ago) | 19 October 2015 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $80 | no data |
| Current price | $40 (0.5x MSRP) | $36 |
Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Phenom II X4 830 has 156% better value for money than Celeron G3900T.
Detailed Specifications
Phenom II X4 830 and Celeron G3900T 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 2.6 GHz |
| Bus support | no data | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 2 MB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 258 mm2 | 98.57 mm210.3 mm × 9.57 mm |
| Number of transistors | 758 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom II X4 830 and Celeron G3900T 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 |
| Socket | AM3 | FCLGA1151 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X4 830 and Celeron G3900T. 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 | no data | + |
| AVX | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| TSX | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | no data | + |
| SIPP | no data | - |
| Status | no data | Discontinued |
Security technologies
Phenom II X4 830 and Celeron G3900T technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| MPX | no data | - |
| SGX | no data | Yes with Intel® ME |
| OS Guard | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom II X4 830 and Celeron G3900T 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 Phenom II X4 830 and Celeron G3900T. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4-1866, DDR4-2133, DDR3L-1333, DDR3L-1600 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 34.1 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | no data | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel HD Graphics 510 |
| Max video memory | no data | 64 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | no data | + |
| 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 Phenom II X4 830 and Celeron G3900T integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | no data | + |
| HDMI | no data | + |
| DVI | no data | + |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Phenom II X4 830 and Celeron G3900T 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 Phenom II X4 830 and Celeron G3900T integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 12 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.4 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Phenom II X4 830 and Celeron G3900T.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
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 G3900T outperforms Phenom II X4 830 by 2% based on our aggregated 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 G3900T outperforms Phenom II X4 830 by 2% 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 G3900T outperforms Phenom II X4 830 by 80% 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 G3900T outperforms Phenom II X4 830 by 2% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Pros & Cons Summary
| Performance score | 1.32 | 1.34 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 35 Watt |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Phenom II X4 830 and Celeron G3900T.
Note that Phenom II X4 830 is a desktop processor while Celeron G3900T is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X4 830 and Celeron G3900T, 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.
