Celeron G3900E vs Phenom II X4 810
Celeron G3900E
Phenom II X4 810
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 Celeron G3900E is positioned at rank 816 and the Phenom II X4 810 is on rank 312, so the Phenom II X4 810 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron G3900E
Performance Per Dollar Phenom II X4 810
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron G3900E | Phenom II X4 810 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($35) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($175) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Skylake (2015−2016) / 14 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Deneb (2009−2011) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron G3900E | Phenom II X4 810 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+400%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($35) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($175) |
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 Celeron G3900E and Phenom II X4 810
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.
Phenom II X4 810
The Phenom II X4 810 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 9 February 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Deneb (2009−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,036 points. Launch price was $116.
Processing Power
The Celeron G3900E packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Phenom II X4 810 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Phenom II X4 810 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the Celeron G3900E versus 2.6 GHz on the Phenom II X4 810 — a 8% clock advantage for the Phenom II X4 810. The Celeron G3900E uses the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Phenom II X4 810 uses Deneb (2009−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron G3900E scores 2,034 against the Phenom II X4 810's 2,036 — a 0.1% lead for the Phenom II X4 810. L3 cache: 2 MB on the Celeron G3900E vs 4 MB (total) on the Phenom II X4 810.
| Feature | Celeron G3900E | Phenom II X4 810 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 4 / 4+100% |
| Boost Clock | 2.4 GHz | 2.6 GHz+8% |
| Base Clock | — | 2.6 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 2 MB | 4 MB (total)+100% |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB | 512 kB (per core) |
| Process | 14 nm-69% | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Skylake (2015−2016) | Deneb (2009−2011) |
| PassMark | 2,034 | 2,036 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 699 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 948 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron G3900E) / not specified (Phenom II X4 810). The Celeron G3900E includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 510), while the Phenom II X4 810 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G3900E targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron G3900E rivals Pentium G4400.
| Feature | Celeron G3900E | Phenom II X4 810 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | — |
| IGPU Model | HD Graphics 510 | — |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | VT-x | — |
| Target Use | Budget | — |
Value Analysis
The Celeron G3900E launched at $107 MSRP, while the Phenom II X4 810 debuted at $175.
| Feature | Celeron G3900E | Phenom II X4 810 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $107-39% | $175 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $35 | — |
| Release Date | 2016 | 2009 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron G3900E and Phenom II X4 810
