Atom x7-E3950 vs Celeron G3900TE

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.

Atom x7-E3950 vs Celeron G3900TE 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.

Atom x7-E3950 vs Celeron G3900TE: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Atom x7-E3950

2016

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 12W instead of 35W, a 23W reduction.

Trade-offs

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

Celeron G3900TE

2015

Why buy it

✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 6) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Atom x7-E3950 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (1,850 vs 1,864).
❌Launch MSRP is still $42 MSRP, while Atom x7-E3950 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌191.7% higher power demand at 35W vs 12W.

Quick Answers

So, is Atom x7-E3950 better than Celeron G3900TE?

Yes. Atom x7-E3950 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 4.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.8% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Atom x7-E3950 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 4.5% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Atom x7-E3950 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.8% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Atom x7-E3950 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Atom x7-E3950 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $42 MSRP, and it still gives you a 4.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron G3900TE only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2015 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (44.0 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA1151.

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

Atom x7-E3950 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2015) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Atom x7-E3950 vs Celeron G3900TE Technical Specifications

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

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. Maximum memory speed reaches LPDDR4-2400 on the Atom x7-E3950 versus DDR4-2133 on the Celeron G3900TE — the Atom x7-E3950 supports 12.5% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron G3900TE supports up to 64 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 700% 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+13%	DDR4-2133
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	64 GB+700%
RAM Channels	4+100%	2
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
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.