Celeron G3900 vs Pro A10-8700B

Celeron G3900 vs Pro A10-8700B Performance Spectrum

Celeron G3900

2 / 2

2,155

0.0%

2,170

+0.7%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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.

Celeron G3900 vs Pro A10-8700B 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.

Celeron G3900 vs Pro A10-8700B: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron G3900

2015

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics 510, while Pro A10-8700B needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Intel Stock), unlike Pro A10-8700B.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,155 vs 2,170).
❌Launch MSRP is still $42 MSRP, while Pro A10-8700B mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌2450% higher power demand at 51W vs 2W.

Pro A10-8700B

2015

Why buy it

✅Draws 2W instead of 51W, a 49W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron G3900 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Celeron G3900.

Quick Answers

So, is Pro A10-8700B better than Celeron G3900?

Yes. Pro A10-8700B is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.7% 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, Pro A10-8700B is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.9% 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, Pro A10-8700B is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Pro A10-8700B is still the much better call for a fresh build. Pro A10-8700B comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $42 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron G3900 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2015 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (51.3 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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?

Pro A10-8700B makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting 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.

Celeron G3900 vs Pro A10-8700B Technical Specifications

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

Celeron G3900

The Celeron G3900 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 51 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 2,155 points. Launch price was $42.

Pro A10-8700B

The Pro A10-8700B is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 3 June 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Carrizo (2015−2018) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FP4. Thermal design power (TDP): 2 MB. Memory support: DDR3/DDR3L-2133. Passmark benchmark score: 2,170 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron G3900 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Pro A10-8700B offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Pro A10-8700B has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the Celeron G3900 versus 3.2 GHz on the Pro A10-8700B — a 13.3% clock advantage for the Pro A10-8700B (base: 2.8 GHz vs 1.8 GHz). The Celeron G3900 uses the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Pro A10-8700B uses Carrizo (2015−2018) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron G3900 scores 2,155 against the Pro A10-8700B's 2,170 — a 0.7% lead for the Pro A10-8700B.

Feature	Celeron G3900	Pro A10-8700B
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	2.8 GHz	3.2 GHz+14%
Base Clock	2.8 GHz+56%	1.8 GHz
L3 Cache	4 MB (total)	—
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	2048 kB+700%
Process	14 nm-50%	28 nm
Architecture	Skylake (2015−2016)	Carrizo (2015−2018)
PassMark	2,155	2,170
Geekbench 6 Single	680	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	1,250	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron G3900 uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Pro A10-8700B uses FP4 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron G3900	Pro A10-8700B
Socket	LGA1151	FP4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2133	—
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	Yes	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Celeron G3900) / not specified (Pro A10-8700B). The Celeron G3900 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 510), while the Pro A10-8700B requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G3900 targets Desktop. Direct competitor: Celeron G3900 rivals Pentium G4400.