Athlon II X4 740 vs Celeron G5900

Athlon II X4 740 vs Celeron G5900 Performance Spectrum

Athlon II X4 740

4 / 4

2,677

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron G5900

2 / 2

2,682

+0.2%

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 740 vs Celeron G5900 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 740 vs Celeron G5900: 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 740

2012

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,677 vs 2,682).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 37.7 vs 53.6 PassMark/$ ($71 MSRP vs $50 MSRP).
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron G5900 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Celeron G5900

2020

Why buy it

✅+0.2% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $21 less on MSRP ($50 MSRP vs $71 MSRP).
✅Delivers 42.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 53.6 vs 37.7 PassMark/$ ($50 MSRP vs $71 MSRP).
✅Draws 58W instead of 65W, a 7W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with UHD Graphics 610, while Athlon II X4 740 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron G5900 better than Athlon II X4 740?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Athlon II X4 740 is ahead with a 1.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron G5900 pulls ahead with 0.2% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron G5900 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron G5900 is the better buy right now. Celeron G5900 comes in $21 cheaper on MSRP at $50 MSRP versus $71 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.2% better PassMark. The compromise is that Athlon II X4 740 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 1.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 42.3% better value on MSRP (53.6 vs 37.7 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Celeron G5900 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2012) 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 740 vs Celeron G5900 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon II X4 740

The Athlon II X4 740 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 1 October 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Piledriver architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 GHz. L2 cache: 4 MB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 watt. Passmark benchmark score: 2,677 points. Launch price was $71.

Celeron G5900

The Celeron G5900 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 58 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 2,682 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Athlon II X4 740 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron G5900 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Athlon II X4 740 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the Athlon II X4 740 versus 3.4 GHz on the Celeron G5900 — a 8.5% clock advantage for the Athlon II X4 740 (base: 3.2 GHz vs 3.4 GHz). The Athlon II X4 740 uses the Piledriver architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron G5900 uses Comet Lake (2020−2025) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X4 740 scores 2,677 against the Celeron G5900's 2,682 — a 0.2% lead for the Celeron G5900.

Feature	Athlon II X4 740	Celeron G5900
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 2
Boost Clock	3.7 GHz+9%	3.4 GHz
Base Clock	3.2 GHz	3.4 GHz+6%
L3 Cache	—	2 MB (total)
L2 Cache	4 MB	256K (per core)+6300%
Process	32 nm	14 nm-56%
Architecture	Piledriver	Comet Lake (2020−2025)
PassMark	2,677	2,682
Geekbench 6 Single	—	850
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	1,600

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon II X4 740 uses the FM2 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron G5900 uses LGA1200 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1866 on the Athlon II X4 740 versus DDR4-2666 on the Celeron G5900 — the Celeron G5900 supports 42.9% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron G5900 supports up to 128 GB of RAM compared to 64 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: AMD FM2 (Athlon II X4 740) and H410,B460,H470,Z490,H510,B560,H570,Z590 (Celeron G5900).

Feature	Athlon II X4 740	Celeron G5900
Socket	FM2	LGA1200
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1866	DDR4-2666+43%
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB	128 GB+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Athlon II X4 740) / VT-x (Celeron G5900). The Celeron G5900 includes integrated graphics (UHD Graphics 610), while the Athlon II X4 740 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G5900 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron G5900 rivals Pentium Gold G6400.

Feature	Athlon II X4 740	Celeron G5900
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	UHD Graphics 610
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	—	VT-x
Target Use	—	Budget

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Athlon II X4 740 was priced at $71, while the Celeron G5900 came in at $50. On launch pricing ($71 vs $50), Celeron G5900 was $21 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon II X4 740 delivers 37.7 pts/$ vs 53.6 pts/$ for the Celeron G5900 — making the Celeron G5900 the 34.9% better value option.

Feature	Athlon II X4 740	Celeron G5900
MSRP	$71	$50-30%
Performance per Dollar	37.7	53.6+42%
Release Date	2012	2020

Search Athlon II X4 740 on Amazon

Search Celeron G5900 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.