Athlon II X4 640
Celeron G3930
Athlon II X4 640 vs Celeron G3930 Performance Spectrum
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 640 vs Celeron G3930 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.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Among Us
Apex Legends
ARC Raiders
Baldur's Gate 3
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
Athlon II X4 640 vs Celeron G3930: 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 640
2010Why buy it
- ✅+21.1% higher Geekbench multi-core.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Celeron G3930.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (386 vs 750).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 28.3 vs 53.8 PassMark/$ ($80 MSRP vs $42 MSRP).
- ❌86.3% higher power demand at 95W vs 51W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron G3930 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Celeron G3930
2017Why buy it
- ✅+94.3% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
- ✅Costs $38 less on MSRP ($42 MSRP vs $80 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 89.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 53.8 vs 28.3 PassMark/$ ($42 MSRP vs $80 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 51W instead of 95W, a 44W reduction.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 610, while Athlon II X4 640 needs a discrete GPU.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (1,100 vs 1,332).
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Athlon II X4 640.
Quick Answers
So, is Celeron G3930 better than Athlon II X4 640?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Athlon II X4 640 vs Celeron G3930 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
Athlon II X4 640
The Athlon II X4 640 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 11 May 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Propus (2009−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3 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: 2,266 points. Launch price was $80.
Celeron G3930
The Celeron G3930 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 January 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 2.9 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 51 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 2133, DDR3L 1333/1600. Passmark benchmark score: 2,259 points. Launch price was $42.
Processing Power
The Athlon II X4 640 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron G3930 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Athlon II X4 640 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3 GHz on the Athlon II X4 640 versus 2.9 GHz on the Celeron G3930 — a 3.4% clock advantage for the Athlon II X4 640 (base: 3 GHz vs 2.9 GHz). The Athlon II X4 640 uses the Propus (2009−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Celeron G3930 uses Kaby Lake (2016−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X4 640 scores 2,266 against the Celeron G3930's 2,259 — a 0.3% lead for the Athlon II X4 640. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 386 vs 750, a 64.1% lead for the Celeron G3930 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 1,332 vs 1,100 (19.1% advantage for the Athlon II X4 640). L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon II X4 640 vs 2 MB (total) on the Celeron G3930.
| Feature | Athlon II X4 640 | Celeron G3930 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 4+100% | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 3 GHz+3% | 2.9 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3 GHz+3% | 2.9 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 2 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB (per core)+100% | 256K (per core) |
| Process | 45 nm | 14 nm-69% |
| Architecture | Propus (2009−2011) | Kaby Lake (2016−2019) |
| PassMark | 2,266 | 2,259 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 1,471 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 386 | 750+94% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 1,332+21% | 1,100 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon II X4 640 uses the AM3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron G3930 uses LGA1151 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the Athlon II X4 640 versus DDR4-2400 on the Celeron G3930 — the Celeron G3930 supports 80% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron G3930 supports up to 64 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: AM2+,AM3 (Athlon II X4 640) and H110,B250,H270,Z270 (Celeron G3930).
| Feature | Athlon II X4 640 | Celeron G3930 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | AM3 | LGA1151 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 3.0+50% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1333 | DDR4-2400+80% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB | 64 GB+300% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (Athlon II X4 640) vs VT-x (Celeron G3930). The Celeron G3930 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 610), while the Athlon II X4 640 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Athlon II X4 640 targets Budget, Celeron G3930 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Athlon II X4 640 rivals Core 2 Quad Q8300; Celeron G3930 rivals Pentium G4560.
| Feature | Athlon II X4 640 | Celeron G3930 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | HD Graphics 610 |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | VT-x |
| Target Use | Budget | Budget |
Value Analysis
At launch, the Athlon II X4 640 was priced at $80, while the Celeron G3930 came in at $42. On launch pricing ($80 vs $42), Celeron G3930 was $38 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon II X4 640 delivers 28.3 pts/$ vs 53.8 pts/$ for the Celeron G3930 — making the Celeron G3930 the 62% better value option.
| Feature | Athlon II X4 640 | Celeron G3930 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $80 | $42-48% |
| Performance per Dollar | 28.3 | 53.8+90% |
| Release Date | 2010 | 2017 |
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.
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Athlon II X4 640 and Celeron G3930
