Celeron M 380 vs A10-5800K
Aggregate performance score
A10-5800K outperforms Celeron M 380 by a whopping 1027% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2233 | 3535 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.35 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | AMD A-Series (Desktop) | Celeron M |
| Power efficiency | 0.71 | 0.30 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Trinity (2012−2013) | Dothan (2004−2005) |
| Release date | 2 October 2012 (13 years ago) | no data |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $122 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
A10-5800K and Celeron M 380 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.2 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 400 MHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | no data |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 1 MB L2 KB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1.004V-1.292V |
Compatibility
Information on A10-5800K and Celeron M 380 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | no data |
| Socket | FM2 | PPGA478, H-PBGA479 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 21 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A10-5800K and Celeron M 380. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | - |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| PAE | no data | 32 Bit |
| FSB parity | no data | - |
Security technologies
A10-5800K and Celeron M 380 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A10-5800K and Celeron M 380 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-x | no data | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-5800K and Celeron M 380. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon HD 7660D (800 MHz) | no data |
Synthetic benchmarks
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating.
wPrime 32
wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.69 | 0.15 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 1 |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 21 Watt |
A10-5800K has a 1026.7% higher aggregate performance score, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 181.3% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron M 380, on the other hand, has 376.2% lower power consumption.
The AMD A10-5800K is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron M 380 in performance tests.
Note that A10-5800K is a desktop processor while Celeron M 380 is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
