Celeron G3900 vs Turion II P540

Celeron G3900 vs Turion II P540 Performance Spectrum

Celeron G3900

2 / 2

2,155

0.0%

2,160

+0.2%

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 Turion II P540 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 Turion II P540: 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 Turion II P540 needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Intel Stock), unlike Turion II P540.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,155 vs 2,160).
❌Launch MSRP is still $42 MSRP, while Turion II P540 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌2450% higher power demand at 51W vs 2W.

Turion II P540

2010

Why buy it

✅+0.2% higher PassMark.
✅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 Celeron G3900 better than Turion II P540?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron G3900 is ahead with a 1.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Turion II P540 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, Turion II P540 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 G3900 is the better buy right now. Celeron G3900 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $42 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Turion II P540 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.2% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (51.3 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 G3900 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2015 vs 2010). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Celeron G3900 vs Turion II P540 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.

Turion II P540

The Turion II P540 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Champlain (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2.4 GHz. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: S1g4. Thermal design power (TDP): 2 MB. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,160 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron G3900 and Turion II P540 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the Celeron G3900 versus 2.4 GHz on the Turion II P540 — a 15.4% clock advantage for the Celeron G3900. The Celeron G3900 uses the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Turion II P540 uses Champlain (2010−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron G3900 scores 2,155 against the Turion II P540's 2,160 — a 0.2% lead for the Turion II P540.

Feature	Celeron G3900	Turion II P540
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.8 GHz+17%	2.4 GHz
Base Clock	2.8 GHz	—
L3 Cache	4 MB (total)	—
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	2 MB+700%
Process	14 nm-69%	45 nm
Architecture	Skylake (2015−2016)	Champlain (2010−2011)
PassMark	2,155	2,160
Geekbench 6 Single	680	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	1,250	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron G3900 uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Turion II P540 uses S1g4 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron G3900	Turion II P540
Socket	LGA1151	S1g4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
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 (Turion II P540). The Celeron G3900 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 510), while the Turion II P540 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G3900 targets Desktop. Direct competitor: Celeron G3900 rivals Pentium G4400.