Intel Celeron G6900TE vs Intel Core i3-4330T Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a consistent, narrow advantage for the Intel Celeron G6900TE across every recorded Cinebench test, with all five head-to-head comparisons going in its favor. The Celeron G6900TE wins the Cinebench R15 multi-core test with a score of 270 against the Core i3-4330T's 265, a delta of 1.9%. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the Celeron G6900TE scores 1128 versus 1108 for the i3-4330T, a 1.8% lead. The single-core results follow the same pattern: Cinebench R20 single-core shows the Celeron G6900TE at 159 and the i3-4330T at 156, another 1.9% gap. Cinebench R23 multi-core sees the Celeron G6900TE post 2687 against 2639, and Cinebench R23 single-core shows 379 against 372, with both deltas at 1.8% and 1.9% respectively.

The consistency of these margins is notable. Every single benchmark result, regardless of the workload type, lands within a narrow band of 1.8% to 1.9% in favor of the Celeron G6900TE. This suggests that the performance difference between these two parts is systematic rather than workload-dependent. The average benchmark scores reinforce this picture: the Celeron G6900TE carries an average score of 925, while the i3-4330T sits at 908. In the broader database context, the Celeron G6900TE ranks at the 25th percentile of all CPUs, with the i3-4330T just below at the 24th percentile.

When looking at the nearest rivals in the database, both processors occupy a tightly clustered performance tier. The Celeron G6900TE's closest competitors include the Intel Core i3-4350T at an average score of 926 (0.2% behind), the Intel Core i5-4288U at 927 (0.2% behind), and the Intel Core i7-870 at 928 (0.3% behind). The AMD FX-4320 trails with 921, placing it 0.4% behind the Celeron G6900TE. The i3-4330T's rival set shows it matching the Intel Core i3-10110Y and AMD Ryzen 3 3250U exactly at 908, while the AMD PRO A12-9800E sits 0.3% ahead at 910, and the AMD A10-7860K trails by 0.4% at 904. These figures demonstrate that both CPUs sit in a very crowded performance neighborhood where single-digit point differences separate multiple processors.

The practical interpretation of these deltas matters. A 1.9% lead in Cinebench R15, or a 48-point gap in Cinebench R23 multi-core, is measurable in controlled benchmarking but unlikely to translate into perceptible real-world differences in most desktop workloads. The data does not support claiming one of these CPUs as meaningfully faster; rather, it shows a marginal but consistent edge for the Celeron G6900TE across all tested scenarios.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the majority of the head-to-head benchmark tests?

A: The Intel Celeron G6900TE wins all five recorded head-to-head benchmarks against the Intel Core i3-4330T. Its victories span Cinebench R15 multi-core, R20 multi-core and single-core, and R23 multi-core and single-core, with deltas ranging from 1.8% to 1.9%.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare between the two CPUs?

A: The Celeron G6900TE has an average benchmark score of 925, while the i3-4330T has an average of 908. This 17-point difference places the Celeron G6900TE at the 25th percentile of all CPUs, one percentile point above the i3-4330T at the 24th percentile.

Q: What is the single largest performance gap recorded between these two processors?

A: The largest recorded gaps are 1.9%, appearing in the Cinebench R15 multi-core, Cinebench R20 single-core, and Cinebench R23 single-core tests. In the R15 multi-core test, the Celeron G6900TE scores 270 versus 265 for the i3-4330T, and in both single-core tests the Celeron G6900TE leads by 3 points (159 to 156 in R20, 379 to 372 in R23).

Q: How does the i3-4330T's average score compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The i3-4330T's average score of 908 exactly matches the Intel Core i3-10110Y and AMD Ryzen 3 3250U. The AMD PRO A12-9800E is 0.3% ahead at 910, while the AMD A10-7860K is 0.4% behind at 904.

Q: Does the Celeron G6900TE show a larger advantage in multi-core or single-core workloads?

A: The advantage is nearly identical in both. Multi-core deltas are 1.9% (R15), 1.8% (R20), and 1.8% (R23), while single-core deltas are 1.9% (R20) and 1.9% (R23). The data shows no meaningful scaling difference between single-threaded and multi-threaded tasks.

Q: Are there any benchmark tests where the Core i3-4330T comes out ahead?

A: No. The recorded head-to-head data shows zero wins for the i3-4330T across all five Cinebench tests. The Celeron G6900TE holds a clean 5-0 record in the database's comparisons.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural eras, and the database records substantial differences in their underlying designs. The Intel Celeron G6900TE is built on Alder Lake architecture, specifically the Alder Lake-S codename, using Intel's 10 nm process node. The Intel Core i3-4330T, by contrast, uses the Haswell architecture and codename, fabricated on a 22 nm process. This process gap is significant: the newer 10 nm node gives the Celeron G6900TE a substantial manufacturing advantage in transistor density and power efficiency, even though both parts are rated at the same 35 W TDP.

Cache hierarchies differ considerably between the two. The Celeron G6900TE allocates 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, while the i3-4330T uses 64 KB of L1 per core and just 256 KB of L2 per core. Both share 4 MB of L3 cache. The Celeron G6900TE's larger per-core L2 allocation is a notable architectural shift, reflecting the Alder Lake design's emphasis on feeding cores with more local data. The i3-4330T's transistor count is recorded at 1,400 million on a 177 mm² die, figures that are not listed for the Celeron G6900TE in the database, so a direct transistor-level comparison cannot be made from the available data.

Threading support also differs. The Celeron G6900TE offers 2 cores and 2 threads, meaning no Hyper-Threading, while the i3-4330T provides 2 cores and 4 threads. The i3-4330T's Hyper-Threading capability gives it twice the logical thread count, yet the benchmark results show the Celeron G6900TE still edges ahead in multi-core tests. This indicates that the Celeron G6900TE's architectural efficiency per thread compensates for its lack of simultaneous multithreading in these Cinebench workloads.

Memory and platform support diverge sharply. The Celeron G6900TE supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus, while the i3-4330T is limited to DDR3, also on a dual-channel bus. The Celeron G6900TE uses PCIe Gen 5, whereas the i3-4330T uses PCIe Gen 3. Integrated graphics differ as well: the Celeron G6900TE pairs with UHD Graphics 710, and the i3-4330T with Intel HD 4600. Neither processor supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers. Release dates in the database show the i3-4330T arriving in 2013 and the Celeron G6900TE in 2022, a gap of roughly nine years in their launch timelines.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show clear separation between the two CPUs across nearly every field except cores, TDP, memory bus width, ECC support, and multiplier unlock status. Both have 2 cores, both are rated at 35 W TDP, both use dual-channel memory buses, neither supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The base clock differs: the Celeron G6900TE runs at 2.40 GHz, while the i3-4330T runs at 3.00 GHz. Neither processor has a boost clock recorded in the database. Thread counts differ, with the Celeron G6900TE at 2 threads and the i3-4330T at 4 threads. Sockets are incompatible: the Celeron G6900TE uses Intel Socket 1700 and the i3-4330T uses Intel Socket 1150. Process nodes differ at 10 nm versus 22 nm. The Celeron G6900TE's cache allocation is larger at L1 and L2, while both share 4 MB of L3. Memory support differs across DDR4/DDR5 for the Celeron G6900TE versus DDR3 for the i3-4330T, and PCIe generation differs at Gen 5 versus Gen 3. Integrated graphics differ between UHD Graphics 710 and Intel HD 4600. The i3-4330T records a transistor count of 1,400 million and a die size of 177 mm², with no equivalent figures available for the Celeron G6900TE. Production status shows the Celeron G6900TE as active with no status recorded for the i3-4330T.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Celeron G6900TE as the faster processor in every benchmark the database records, but the margins are consistently small. A 1.9% advantage in Cinebench R15 multi-core, a 1.8% edge in R20 and R23 multi-core, and 1.9% leads in both single-core tests do not represent a generational leap. The Celeron G6900TE's average benchmark score of 925 versus the i3-4330T's 908 reflects a processor that is modestly ahead in raw Cinebench performance, while its 25th percentile ranking versus the i3-4330T's 24th percentile confirms they occupy essentially the same performance tier.

For buyers who prioritize the latest platform features, the Celeron G6900TE offers clear advantages: DDR4 and DDR5 memory support, PCIe Gen 5, a 10 nm process, and a modern Socket 1700 platform. For those who need Hyper-Threading, the i3-4330T provides 4 threads against the Celeron G6900TE's 2, which could matter in heavily threaded workloads beyond the Cinebench tests recorded here, though the database's multi-core results do not show a win for the i3-4330T. The i3-4330T's higher 3.00 GHz base clock does not translate into a benchmark victory in the recorded data.

The verdict is straightforward: the Celeron G6900TE is the better-performing CPU in the database's measured tests, with a narrow but complete sweep. Users requiring modern memory and PCIe standards should favor it decisively. The i3-4330T remains competitive in the same performance class, but nothing in the recorded data gives it a winning case over the Celeron G6900TE.

Where Each One Wins

The Celeron G6900TE wins across all measured Cinebench workloads, making it the choice for both single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering tasks in the database's test suite. Its victories in Cinebench R23 multi-core (2687 versus 2639) and single-core (379 versus 372) indicate that users running modern Cinebench versions, or similar rendering workloads, should see a slight edge with this part. The Celeron G6900TE also wins on platform modernity: DDR4 and DDR5 support, PCIe Gen 5, and Intel Socket 1700 compatibility make it the more future-ready option for new system builds. Its 10 nm process node and active production status further support its case as the more current product.

The i3-4330T's strengths lie in areas the benchmark data does not directly measure. Its 4 threads versus 2 threads give it a theoretical advantage in workloads that scale with thread count beyond what Cinebench's multi-core tests capture, such as certain productivity or multitasking scenarios. Its higher 3.00 GHz base clock could benefit lightly threaded applications that respond strongly to raw clock speed, although the recorded Cinebench single-core scores do not reflect an advantage. The i3-4330T also fits the older Intel Socket 1150 platform, which may be relevant for users upgrading an existing Haswell-era system without changing motherboards. Its DDR3 memory support aligns with that older ecosystem, and its smaller 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per-core cache layout is simply a product of its earlier architectural era, not a point in its favor.

In summary, the Celeron, the i3-4330T, and the database's rival sets show that these two CPUs are close enough in the broader market that price, platform needs, and specific workload characteristics outside the recorded tests are the only factors that could tip a decision toward the older Haswell part. The Celeron G6900TE takes home all five benchmark wins and the better average score, and the data offers no measured scenario where the i3-4330T comes out ahead.