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 Xeon E5420 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 Xeon E5420: 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

✅+122.6% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅Costs $7,107 less on MSRP ($107 MSRP vs $7,214 MSRP).
✅Delivers 6609.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 19.0 vs 0.3 PassMark/$ ($107 MSRP vs $7,214 MSRP).
✅Draws 35W instead of 80W, a 45W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 510, while Xeon E5420 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (2 MB vs 12 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon E5420, which brings 4 cores / 4 threads and 32 PCIe lanes.

Xeon E5420

2007

Why buy it

✅+500% larger total L3 cache (12 MB vs 2 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 4 cores / 4 threads, plus 32 PCIe lanes vs 16.
✅100% more PCIe lanes (32 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (314 vs 699).
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (881 vs 948).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 0.3 vs 19.0 PassMark/$ ($7,214 MSRP vs $107 MSRP).
❌128.6% higher power demand at 80W 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 Xeon E5420?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E5420 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Celeron G3900E is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron G3900E is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.5% 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, Celeron G3900E is the stronger fit. You are getting 7.6% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron G3900E is the better buy right now. Celeron G3900E comes in $7,107 cheaper on MSRP at $107 MSRP versus $7,214 MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 6609.1% better value on MSRP (19.0 vs 0.3 PassMark/$), 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 G3900E makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2007) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron G3900E vs Xeon E5420 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.

Xeon E5420

The Xeon E5420 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 11 November 2007 (18 years ago). It is based on the Harpertown (2007−2008) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB L2 Cache. L2 cache: 6 MB (total). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA771. Thermal design power (TDP): 80 Watt. Memory support: DDR2, DDR3 Depends on motherboard. Passmark benchmark score: 2,044 points. Launch price was $316.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron G3900E packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Xeon E5420 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Xeon E5420 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the Celeron G3900E versus 2.5 GHz on the Xeon E5420 — a 4.1% clock advantage for the Xeon E5420. The Celeron G3900E uses the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture (14 nm), while the Xeon E5420 uses Harpertown (2007−2008) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron G3900E scores 2,034 against the Xeon E5420's 2,044 — a 0.5% lead for the Xeon E5420. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 699 vs 314, a 76% lead for the Celeron G3900E that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 948 vs 881 (7.3% advantage for the Celeron G3900E). L3 cache: 2 MB on the Celeron G3900E vs 12 MB L2 Cache on the Xeon E5420.

Feature	Celeron G3900E	Xeon E5420
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	2.4 GHz	2.5 GHz+4%
Base Clock	—	2.5 GHz
L3 Cache	2 MB	12 MB L2 Cache+500%
L2 Cache	512 kB	6 MB (total)+1100%
Process	14 nm-69%	45 nm
Architecture	Skylake (2015−2016)	Harpertown (2007−2008)
PassMark	2,034	2,044
Geekbench 6 Single	699+123%	314
Geekbench 6 Multi	948+8%	881

🧠

Memory & Platform

Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2133 on the Celeron G3900E versus DDR2-667 on the Xeon E5420 — the Celeron G3900E supports 219.8% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron G3900E supports up to 64 GB of RAM compared to 32 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Celeron G3900E) vs 4 (Xeon E5420). PCIe lanes: 16 (Celeron G3900E) vs 32 (Xeon E5420) — the Xeon E5420 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: H110,B150,H170,Z170 (Celeron G3900E) and Intel 5000P,Intel 5100,Intel 5400 (Xeon E5420).

Feature	Celeron G3900E	Xeon E5420
Socket	—	LGA771
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2133+220%	DDR2-667
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB+100%	32 GB
RAM Channels	2	4+100%
ECC Support	Yes	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	32+100%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron G3900E) vs Yes (Xeon E5420). The Celeron G3900E includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 510), while the Xeon E5420 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G3900E targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron G3900E rivals Pentium G4400.

Feature	Celeron G3900E	Xeon E5420
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	HD Graphics 510	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x	Yes
Target Use	Budget	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Celeron G3900E was priced at $107, while the Xeon E5420 came in at $7214. On launch pricing ($107 vs $7214), Celeron G3900E was $7107 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron G3900E delivers 19.0 pts/$ vs 0.3 pts/$ for the Xeon E5420 — making the Celeron G3900E the 194.1% better value option.

Feature	Celeron G3900E	Xeon E5420
MSRP	$107-99%	$7214
Performance per Dollar	19.0+6233%	0.3
Release Date	2016	2007

Search Celeron G3900E on Amazon

Search Xeon E5420 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.