Atom x7-E3950 vs Celeron G3900TE
Atom x7-E3950
Celeron G3900TE
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Atom x7-E3950 is positioned at rank 480 and the Celeron G3900TE is on rank 467, so the Celeron G3900TE offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Atom x7-E3950
Performance Per Dollar Celeron G3900TE
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Atom x7-E3950 | Celeron G3900TE |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($45) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Apollo Lake (2014−2016) / 14 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Skylake (2015−2016) / 14 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Atom x7-E3950 | Celeron G3900TE |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($45) |
Performance Check
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron G3900TE
Atom x7-E3950
The Atom x7-E3950 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 August 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Apollo Lake (2014−2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB (total). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1296. Thermal design power (TDP): 12 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,864 points. Launch price was $57.
Celeron G3900TE
The Celeron G3900TE is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 19 October 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2.3 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3L-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 1,850 points. Launch price was $42.
Processing Power
The Atom x7-E3950 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron G3900TE offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Atom x7-E3950 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Atom x7-E3950 versus 2.3 GHz on the Celeron G3900TE — a 14% clock advantage for the Celeron G3900TE. The Atom x7-E3950 uses the Apollo Lake (2014−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Celeron G3900TE uses Skylake (2015−2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Atom x7-E3950 scores 1,864 against the Celeron G3900TE's 1,850 — a 0.8% lead for the Atom x7-E3950. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 245 vs 514, a 70.9% lead for the Celeron G3900TE that directly translates to higher frame rates. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Atom x7-E3950 vs 2 MB on the Celeron G3900TE.
| Feature | Atom x7-E3950 | Celeron G3900TE |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 4+100% | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2 GHz | 2.3 GHz+15% |
| Base Clock | 1.6 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 2 MB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB (total)+300% | 512 kB |
| Process | 14 nm | 14 nm |
| Architecture | Apollo Lake (2014−2016) | Skylake (2015−2016) |
| PassMark | 1,864 | 1,850 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 245 | 514+110% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 903 |
Memory & Platform
The Atom x7-E3950 uses the FCBGA1296 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron G3900TE uses LGA1151 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to LPDDR4-2400 memory speed. The Celeron G3900TE supports up to 64 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 155.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 4 (Atom x7-E3950) vs 2 (Celeron G3900TE). PCIe lanes: 6 (Atom x7-E3950) vs 16 (Celeron G3900TE) — the Celeron G3900TE offers 10 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Apollo Lake (Atom x7-E3950) and H110,Q170 (Celeron G3900TE).
| Feature | Atom x7-E3950 | Celeron G3900TE |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA1296 | LGA1151 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | LPDDR4-2400 | DDR4-2133 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 GB | 64 GB+700% |
| RAM Channels | 4+100% | 2 |
| ECC Support | ✅ | ✅ |
| PCIe Lanes | 6 | 16+167% |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics 505 (Atom x7-E3950) and Intel HD Graphics 510 (Celeron G3900TE) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G3900TE targets Embedded. Direct competitor: Celeron G3900TE rivals Pentium G4400T.
| Feature | Atom x7-E3950 | Celeron G3900TE |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | Yes |
| IGPU Model | HD Graphics 505 | Intel HD Graphics 510 |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | — | Embedded |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Atom x7-E3950 and Celeron G3900TE
