Celeron 4305UE vs A12-9800
Aggregate performance score
A12-9800 outperforms Celeron 4305UE by a whopping 119% 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 | 2008 | 2640 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.47 | 1.38 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Power efficiency | 1.37 | 2.71 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | no data | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) | Whiskey Lake-U (2018−2019) |
| Release date | 27 July 2017 (8 years ago) | 1 October 2018 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $139 | $107 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Celeron 4305UE has 194% better value for money than A12-9800.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
A12-9800 and Celeron 4305UE 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 3.8 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 4.2 GHz | 2 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 2048 KB | 256 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 2 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on A12-9800 and Celeron 4305UE 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 | 1 |
| Socket | AM4 | Intel BGA 1528 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A12-9800 and Celeron 4305UE. 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 | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A12-9800 and Celeron 4305UE are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A12-9800 and Celeron 4305UE. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-2400 | DDR4 |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon R7 Graphics | Intel UHD Graphics 610 |
| iGPU core count | 8 | no data |
| Enduro | + | - |
| UVD | + | - |
| VCE | + | - |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of A12-9800 and Celeron 4305UE integrated GPUs.
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by A12-9800 and Celeron 4305UE integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | no data |
| Vulkan | + | - |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A12-9800 and Celeron 4305UE.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 8 | 16 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.10 | 0.96 |
| Recency | 27 July 2017 | 1 October 2018 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 15 Watt |
A12-9800 has a 118.8% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
Celeron 4305UE, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 180% more advanced lithography process, and 333.3% lower power consumption.
The AMD A12-9800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron 4305UE in performance tests.
Note that A12-9800 is a desktop processor while Celeron 4305UE 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.
