Athlon II X4 620 vs Celeron G3900E

Athlon II X4 620 vs Celeron G3900E Performance Spectrum

Athlon II X4 620

4 / 4

2,026

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron G3900E

2 / 2

2,034

+0.4%

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Athlon II X4 620 vs Celeron G3900E FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Athlon II X4 620 vs Celeron G3900E: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Athlon II X4 620

2009

Why buy it

✅Costs $8 less on MSRP ($99 MSRP vs $107 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,026 vs 2,034).
❌171.4% higher power demand at 95W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron G3900E can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Celeron G3900E

2016

Why buy it

✅+0.4% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 35W instead of 95W, a 60W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 510, while Athlon II X4 620 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌
8.1% HIGHER MSRP
$107 MSRPvs$99 MSRP

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron G3900E better than Athlon II X4 620?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Athlon II X4 620 is ahead with a 2.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron G3900E pulls ahead with 0.4% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron G3900E is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Celeron G3900E is still the much better call for a fresh build. Celeron G3900E comes in 8.1% more expensive on MSRP at $107 MSRP versus $99 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.4% better PassMark. Athlon II X4 620 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2009 platform. Even with 7.7% better value on paper (20.5 vs 19.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on AM3.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Celeron G3900E makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2009) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Athlon II X4 620 vs Celeron G3900E Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Athlon II X4 620

The Athlon II X4 620 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 16 September 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Propus (2009−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,026 points. Launch price was $65.

Celeron G3900E

The Celeron G3900E is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2 January 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: LPDDR3-1866. Passmark benchmark score: 2,034 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

The Athlon II X4 620 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron G3900E offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Athlon II X4 620 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Athlon II X4 620 versus 2.4 GHz on the Celeron G3900E — a 8% clock advantage for the Athlon II X4 620. The Athlon II X4 620 uses the Propus (2009−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Celeron G3900E uses Skylake (2015−2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X4 620 scores 2,026 against the Celeron G3900E's 2,034 — a 0.4% lead for the Celeron G3900E. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon II X4 620 vs 2 MB on the Celeron G3900E.

Feature	Athlon II X4 620	Celeron G3900E
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.6 GHz+8%	2.4 GHz
Base Clock	2.6 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	2 MB
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	512 kB
Process	45 nm	14 nm-69%
Architecture	Propus (2009−2011)	Skylake (2015−2016)
PassMark	2,026	2,034
Geekbench 6 Single	—	699
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	948

🧠

Memory & Platform

Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the Athlon II X4 620 versus DDR4-2133 on the Celeron G3900E — the Celeron G3900E supports 60% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron G3900E supports up to 64 GB of RAM compared to 32 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon II X4 620) vs 16 (Celeron G3900E) — the Celeron G3900E offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD AM3 (Athlon II X4 620) and H110,B150,H170,Z170 (Celeron G3900E).

Feature	Athlon II X4 620	Celeron G3900E
Socket	AM3	—
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	DDR4-2133+60%
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	64 GB+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	0	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Athlon II X4 620) / VT-x (Celeron G3900E). The Celeron G3900E includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 510), while the Athlon II X4 620 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G3900E targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron G3900E rivals Pentium G4400.

Feature	Athlon II X4 620	Celeron G3900E
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	HD Graphics 510
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	—	VT-x
Target Use	—	Budget

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Athlon II X4 620 was priced at $99, while the Celeron G3900E came in at $107. On launch pricing ($99 vs $107), Athlon II X4 620 was $8 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon II X4 620 delivers 20.5 pts/$ vs 19.0 pts/$ for the Celeron G3900E — making the Athlon II X4 620 the 7.4% better value option.

Feature	Athlon II X4 620	Celeron G3900E
MSRP	$99-7%	$107
Performance per Dollar	20.5+8%	19.0
Release Date	2009	2016

Search Athlon II X4 620 on Amazon

Search Celeron G3900E on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.