Celeron M 410 vs A10-9700

Primary details

Comparing A10-9700 and Celeron M 410 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1826not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.64no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataCeleron M
Power efficiency3.25no data
Architecture codenameBristol Ridge (2016−2019)Yonah (2005−2006)
Release date27 July 2017 (7 years ago)no data (2024 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$90no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

A10-9700 and Celeron M 410 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)1 (Single-Core)
Threads41
Base clock speed3.5 GHz1.46 GHz
Boost clock speed3.8 GHz1.46 GHz
Bus rateno data533 MHz
L2 cache2048 KBno data
L3 cache0 KB1 MB L2 KB
Chip lithography28 nm65 nm
Die size250 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature90 °C100 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors3,100 millionno data
64 bit support+-
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data1.0V-1.3V

Compatibility

Information on A10-9700 and Celeron M 410 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 configuration1no data
SocketAM4PPGA478
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt27 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A10-9700 and Celeron M 410. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-
PowerTune+-
TrueAudio+-
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
VirusProtect+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data-
Demand Based Switchingno data-
PAEno data32 Bit
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

A10-9700 and Celeron M 410 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A10-9700 and Celeron M 410 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-xno data-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-9700 and Celeron M 410. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2400no data
Max memory channels2no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R7 Graphicsno data
iGPU core count6no data
Enduro+-
UVD+-
VCE+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A10-9700 and Celeron M 410 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A10-9700 and Celeron M 410 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A10-9700 and Celeron M 410.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes8no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.



Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

A10-9700 3546
+2783%
Celeron M 410 123

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 4 1
Threads 4 1
Chip lithography 28 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 27 Watt

A10-9700 has 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 132.1% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron M 410, on the other hand, has 140.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between A10-9700 and Celeron M 410. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that A10-9700 is a desktop processor while Celeron M 410 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A10-9700 and Celeron M 410, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD A10-9700
A10-9700
Intel Celeron M 410
Celeron M 410

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.5 413 votes

Rate A10-9700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

No user ratings yet.

Rate Celeron M 410 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A10-9700 or Celeron M 410, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.