Key Differences
In short — Celeron G3930 outperforms the cheaper Core i3-3240 on the selected game parameters. However, the worse performing Core i3-3240 is a better bang for your buck. The better performing Celeron G3930 is 1583 days newer than the cheaper Core i3-3240.
Advantages of Intel Core i3-3240
- Up to 58% cheaper than Celeron G3930 - $41.0 vs $98.02
- Up to 59% better value when playing A Plague Tale: Requiem than Celeron G3930 - $0.34 vs $0.82 per FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than Intel Celeron G3930 - 4 vs 2 threads
Advantages of Intel Celeron G3930
- Performs up to 1% better in A Plague Tale: Requiem than Core i3-3240 - 120 vs 119 FPS
- Consumes up to 7% less energy than Intel Core i3-3240 - 51 vs 55 Watts
A Plague Tale: Requiem
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Sep 3rd, 2012
FPS
119
99.16666666666667%
Value, $/FPS
$0.34/FPS
100%
Price, $
$41
100%
Value Winner
Buy for $41 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 349631 minutes ago
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
FPS
120
100%
Value, $/FPS
$0.82/FPS
41.463414634146346%
Price, $
$98.02
41%
FPS Winner
Buy for $98.02 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 349631 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
Ultra
Desktop • Sep 3rd, 2012
Desktop • Jan 3rd, 2017
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Intel Core i3-3240 | vs | Intel Celeron G3930 |
---|---|---|
Sep 3rd, 2012 | Release Date | Jan 3rd, 2017 |
Core i3 | Collection | Celeron |
Ivy Bridge | Codename | Kaby Lake |
Intel Socket 1155 | Socket | Intel Socket 1151 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
2 | Cores | 2 |
4 | Threads | 2 |
3.4 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 2.9 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | Non-Turbo |
55 W | TDP | 51 W |
22 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
34.0x | Multiplier | 29.0x |
Intel HD 2500 | Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 610 |
No | Overclockable | No |