Celeron G5900 vs Core i3-4110M

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 G5900 vs Core i3-4110M 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 G5900 vs Core i3-4110M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Celeron G5900

2020

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.5% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 58W instead of 512W, a 454W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (2 MB vs 3 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $50 MSRP, while Core i3-4110M mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Core i3-4110M

2014

Why buy it

✅+50% larger total L3 cache (3 MB vs 2 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Celeron G5900 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (2,678 vs 2,682).
❌782.8% higher power demand at 512W vs 58W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron G5900 better than Core i3-4110M?

Yes. Celeron G5900 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 3.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.1% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron G5900 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.5% 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 G5900 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron G5900 is the better buy right now. Celeron G5900 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $50 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (53.6 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 G5900 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2014) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Celeron G5900 vs Core i3-4110M Technical Specifications

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

Celeron G5900

The Celeron G5900 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1200. Thermal design power (TDP): 58 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2666. Passmark benchmark score: 2,682 points. Launch price was $69.

Core i3-4110M

The Core i3-4110M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 April 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA946. Thermal design power (TDP): 37 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,678 points. Launch price was $225.

⚡

Processing Power

The Celeron G5900 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i3-4110M's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 3.4 GHz on the Celeron G5900 versus 2.6 GHz on the Core i3-4110M — a 26.7% clock advantage for the Celeron G5900 (base: 3.4 GHz vs 2.6 GHz). The Celeron G5900 uses the Comet Lake (2020−2025) architecture (14 nm), while the Core i3-4110M uses Haswell (2013−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron G5900 scores 2,682 against the Core i3-4110M's 2,678 — a 0.1% lead for the Celeron G5900. L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron G5900 vs 3 MB on the Core i3-4110M.

Feature	Celeron G5900	Core i3-4110M
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	3.4 GHz+31%	2.6 GHz
Base Clock	3.4 GHz+31%	2.6 GHz
L3 Cache	2 MB (total)	3 MB+50%
L2 Cache	256K (per core)	512 kB+100%
Process	14 nm-36%	22 nm
Architecture	Comet Lake (2020−2025)	Haswell (2013−2015)
PassMark	2,682	2,678
Geekbench 6 Single	850	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	1,600	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron G5900 uses the LGA1200 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i3-4110M uses PGA946 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2666 on the Celeron G5900 versus DDR3L-1600 on the Core i3-4110M — the Celeron G5900 supports 66.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron G5900 supports up to 128 GB of RAM compared to 32 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes.

Feature	Celeron G5900	Core i3-4110M
Socket	LGA1200	PGA946
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2666+67%	DDR3L-1600
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB+300%	32 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	Yes	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron G5900) vs VT-x, VT-d (Core i3-4110M). Both include integrated graphics — UHD Graphics 610 (Celeron G5900) and HD Graphics 4600 (Core i3-4110M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G5900 targets Budget, Core i3-4110M targets Mobile. Direct competitor: Celeron G5900 rivals Pentium Gold G6400.