Celeron G3930TE vs Phenom II X4 920

Celeron G3930TE vs Phenom II X4 920 Performance Spectrum

Celeron G3930TE

2 / 2

2,218

+0.7%

2,202

0.0%

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 G3930TE vs Phenom II X4 920 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 G3930TE vs Phenom II X4 920: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron G3930TE

2017

Why buy it

✅+0.7% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 35W instead of 125W, a 90W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 610, while Phenom II X4 920 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (2 MB vs 6 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $42 MSRP, while Phenom II X4 920 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Phenom II X4 920

2009

Why buy it

✅+200% larger total L3 cache (6 MB vs 2 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,202 vs 2,218).
❌257.1% higher power demand at 125W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron G3930TE can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron G3930TE better than Phenom II X4 920?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Phenom II X4 920 is ahead with a 1.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron G3930TE pulls ahead with 0.7% better PassMark. Phenom II X4 920 also has the bigger cache pool with 200% larger total L3 cache (6 MB vs 2 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron G3930TE is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron G3930TE is the better buy right now. Celeron G3930TE comes in at an unclear MSRP at $42 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.7% better PassMark. The compromise is that Phenom II X4 920 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 1.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (52.8 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 G3930TE makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2009) 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 G3930TE vs Phenom II X4 920 Technical Specifications

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

Celeron G3930TE

The Celeron G3930TE is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 12 June 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 2.7 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1151. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2133, DDR3L-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 2,218 points. Launch price was $42.

Phenom II X4 920

The Phenom II X4 920 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 8 January 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Deneb (2009−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,202 points. Launch price was $90.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron G3930TE packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Phenom II X4 920 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Phenom II X4 920 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.7 GHz on the Celeron G3930TE versus 2.8 GHz on the Phenom II X4 920 — a 3.6% clock advantage for the Phenom II X4 920 (base: 2.7 GHz vs 2.8 GHz). The Celeron G3930TE uses the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the Phenom II X4 920 uses Deneb (2009−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron G3930TE scores 2,218 against the Phenom II X4 920's 2,202 — a 0.7% lead for the Celeron G3930TE. L3 cache: 2 MB on the Celeron G3930TE vs 6 MB (total) on the Phenom II X4 920.

Feature	Celeron G3930TE	Phenom II X4 920
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	2.7 GHz	2.8 GHz+4%
Base Clock	2.7 GHz	2.8 GHz+4%
L3 Cache	2 MB	6 MB (total)+200%
L2 Cache	512 kB	512 kB (per core)
Process	14 nm-69%	45 nm
Architecture	Kaby Lake (2016−2019)	Deneb (2009−2011)
PassMark	2,218	2,202
Geekbench 6 Single	548	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	948	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron G3930TE uses the LGA1151 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Phenom II X4 920 uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron G3930TE	Phenom II X4 920
Socket	LGA1151	AM3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2400	—
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	Yes	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x (Celeron G3930TE) / not specified (Phenom II X4 920). The Celeron G3930TE includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 610), while the Phenom II X4 920 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G3930TE targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron G3930TE rivals Pentium G4560T.