Celeron 220 vs A4-3305M

VS

Aggregate performance score

A4-3305M
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.47
+262%
Celeron 220
2007
1 core / 1 thread, 19 Watt
0.13

A4-3305M outperforms Celeron 220 by a whopping 262% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A4-3305M and Celeron 220 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking29213343
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-Seriesno data
Power efficiency1.270.65
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Conroe (2006−2007)
Release date14 June 2011 (13 years ago)October 2007 (17 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A4-3305M and Celeron 220 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 cores2 (Dual-core)1 (Single-Core)
Threads21
Base clock speed1.9 GHz1.2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz1.2 GHz
Bus rateno data533 MHz
L1 cache128K (per core)64 KB
L2 cache512K (per core)512 KB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm65 nm
Die size228 mm277 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistors1,178 million105 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data1V-1.3375V

Compatibility

Information on A4-3305M and Celeron 220 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 configuration11
SocketFS1PBGA479
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt19 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A4-3305M and Celeron 220. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6480Gno data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

A4-3305M and Celeron 220 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A4-3305M and Celeron 220 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data-
VT-xno data-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A4-3305M and Celeron 220. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon HD 6480G (593 MHz)no 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.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

A4-3305M 0.47
+262%
Celeron 220 0.13

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.

A4-3305M 751
+259%
Celeron 220 209

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.47 0.13
Physical cores 2 1
Threads 2 1
Chip lithography 32 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 19 Watt

A4-3305M has a 261.5% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 103.1% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron 220, on the other hand, has 84.2% lower power consumption.

The A4-3305M is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 220 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A4-3305M and Celeron 220, 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 A4-3305M
A4-3305M
Intel Celeron 220
Celeron 220

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.


3.3 114 votes

Rate A4-3305M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 61 vote

Rate Celeron 220 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A4-3305M or Celeron 220, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.