Celeron G3900 vs Phenom X4 9650

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Phenom X4 9650
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.11
Celeron G3900
2015
2 cores / 2 threads, 51 Watt
1.40
+26.1%

Celeron G3900 outperforms Phenom X4 9650 by a significant 26% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Phenom X4 9650 and Celeron G3900 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking23022129
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.720.18
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Seriesno dataIntel Celeron
Architecture codenameAgena (2007−2008)Skylake (2015−2016)
Release dateMarch 2008 (16 years ago)1 September 2015 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$42
Current price$23 $37 (0.9x MSRP)

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Phenom X4 9650 has 2522% better value for money than Celeron G3900.

Detailed specifications

Phenom X4 9650 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speedno data2.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.3 GHz2.8 GHz
Bus supportno data4 × 8 GT/s
L1 cache128 KB (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache512 KB (per core)256 KB (per core)
L3 cache2 MB (shared)4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography65 nm14 nm
Die size285 mm2150 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data65 °C
Number of transistors450 million1,400 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Phenom X4 9650 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 configuration11
SocketAM2+FCLGA1151
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt51 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom X4 9650 and Celeron G3900. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NIno data+
AVXno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
TSXno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoringno data+
SIPPno data-
Statusno dataLaunched

Security technologies

Phenom X4 9650 and Celeron G3900 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
MPXno data-
SGXno dataYes with Intel® ME
OS Guardno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom X4 9650 and Celeron G3900 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+no data
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom X4 9650 and Celeron G3900. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3, DDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data64 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data34.1 GB/s
ECC memory supportno data+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel HD Graphics 510
Max video memoryno data64 GB
Quick Sync Videono data+
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data950 MHz
InTru 3Dno data+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Phenom X4 9650 and Celeron G3900 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPortno data+
HDMIno data+
DVIno data+

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Phenom X4 9650 and Celeron G3900 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution supportno data+
Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096x2304@24Hz
Max resolution over eDPno data4096x2304@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data4096x2304@60Hz
Max resolution over VGAno dataN/A

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Phenom X4 9650 and Celeron G3900 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12
OpenGLno data4.4

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Phenom X4 9650 and Celeron G3900.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

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.

Phenom X4 9650 1.11
Celeron G3900 1.40
+26.1%

Celeron G3900 outperforms Phenom X4 9650 by 26% 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%

Phenom X4 9650 1713
Celeron G3900 2165
+26.4%

Celeron G3900 outperforms Phenom X4 9650 by 26% 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%

Phenom X4 9650 238
Celeron G3900 582
+145%

Celeron G3900 outperforms Phenom X4 9650 by 145% 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%

Phenom X4 9650 765
Celeron G3900 995
+30.1%

Celeron G3900 outperforms Phenom X4 9650 by 30% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.11 1.40
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 65 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 51 Watt

The Celeron G3900 is our recommended choice as it beats the Phenom X4 9650 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom X4 9650 and Celeron G3900, 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.


AMD Phenom X4 9650
Phenom X4 9650
Intel Celeron G3900
Celeron G3900

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.


3.9 203 votes

Rate Phenom X4 9650 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 198 votes

Rate Celeron G3900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Phenom X4 9650 or Celeron G3900, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.