Celeron G3900E vs Pentium G3420

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 G3900E vs Pentium G3420 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 G3900E vs Pentium G3420: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron G3900E

2016

Why buy it

✅+0.6% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 35W instead of 54W, a 19W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 510, while Pentium G3420 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (2 MB vs 3 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 19.0 vs 23.5 PassMark/$ ($107 MSRP vs $86 MSRP).

Pentium G3420

2013

Why buy it

✅+50% larger total L3 cache (3 MB vs 2 MB).
✅Costs $21 less on MSRP ($86 MSRP vs $107 MSRP).
✅Delivers 23.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 23.5 vs 19.0 PassMark/$ ($86 MSRP vs $107 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,022 vs 2,034).
❌54.3% higher power demand at 54W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron G3900E can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron G3900E better than Pentium G3420?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Pentium G3420 is ahead with a 1.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron G3900E pulls ahead with 0.6% better PassMark. Pentium G3420 also has the bigger cache pool with 50% larger total L3 cache (3 MB vs 2 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron G3900E is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron G3900E is still the much better call for a fresh build. Celeron G3900E comes in 24.4% more expensive on MSRP at $107 MSRP versus $86 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.6% better PassMark. Pentium G3420 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2013 platform. Even with 23.7% better value on paper (23.5 vs 19.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA1150.

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

Celeron G3900E makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2013) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron G3900E vs Pentium G3420 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron G3900E

The Celeron G3900E is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2 January 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: LPDDR3-1866. Passmark benchmark score: 2,034 points. Launch price was $107.

Pentium G3420

The Pentium G3420 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1150. Thermal design power (TDP): 53 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,022 points. Launch price was $252.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron G3900E and Pentium G3420 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the Celeron G3900E versus 3.2 GHz on the Pentium G3420 — a 28.6% clock advantage for the Pentium G3420. The Celeron G3900E uses the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Pentium G3420 uses Haswell (2013−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron G3900E scores 2,034 against the Pentium G3420's 2,022 — a 0.6% lead for the Celeron G3900E. L3 cache: 2 MB on the Celeron G3900E vs 3 MB (total) on the Pentium G3420.

Feature	Celeron G3900E	Pentium G3420
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.4 GHz	3.2 GHz+33%
Base Clock	—	3.2 GHz
L3 Cache	2 MB	3 MB (total)+50%
L2 Cache	512 kB+100%	256 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-36%	22 nm
Architecture	Skylake (2015−2016)	Haswell (2013−2015)
PassMark	2,034	2,022
Geekbench 6 Single	699	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	948	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron G3900E) / not specified (Pentium G3420). The Celeron G3900E includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 510), while the Pentium G3420 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G3900E targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron G3900E rivals Pentium G4400.

Feature	Celeron G3900E	Pentium G3420
Integrated GPU	Yes	—
IGPU Model	HD Graphics 510	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	VT-x	—
Target Use	Budget	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron G3900E was priced at $107, while the Pentium G3420 came in at $86. On launch pricing ($107 vs $86), Pentium G3420 was $21 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron G3900E delivers 19.0 pts/$ vs 23.5 pts/$ for the Pentium G3420 — making the Pentium G3420 the 21.2% better value option.

Feature	Celeron G3900E	Pentium G3420
MSRP	$107	$86-20%
Performance per Dollar	19.0	23.5+24%
Release Date	2016	2013

Search Celeron G3900E on Amazon

Search Pentium G3420 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.