Celeron 2961Y vs A4-3305M
Aggregate performance score
A4-3305M outperforms Celeron 2961Y by a small 9% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A4-3305M and Celeron 2961Y processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2921 | 2969 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD A-Series | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | 1.27 | 3.39 |
| Architecture codename | Llano (2011−2012) | Haswell (2013−2015) |
| Release date | 14 June 2011 (13 years ago) | 1 December 2013 (11 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $107 |
Detailed specifications
A4-3305M and Celeron 2961Y 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 1.9 GHz | 1.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 1.1 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 5 GT/s |
| L1 cache | 128K (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 256K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 2 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | 228 mm2 | 118 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 1,400 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on A4-3305M and Celeron 2961Y 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 | FS1 | FCBGA1168 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 11.5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A4-3305M and Celeron 2961Y. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6480G | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2 |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Smart Response | no data | - |
| GPIO | no data | + |
| Smart Connect | no data | + |
| FDI | no data | - |
| AMT | no data | 9.5 |
| Matrix Storage | no data | - |
| HD Audio | no data | + |
| RST | no data | + |
Security technologies
A4-3305M and Celeron 2961Y technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A4-3305M and Celeron 2961Y are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
| VT-d | no data | - |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A4-3305M and Celeron 2961Y. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 16 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 25.6 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon HD 6480G (593 MHz) | Intel HD Graphics for 4th Generation Intel Processors |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Clear Video | no data | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 850 MHz |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of A4-3305M and Celeron 2961Y integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | - | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A4-3305M and Celeron 2961Y.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 12 |
| PCI support | no data | - |
| USB revision | no data | 3.0 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 4 |
| Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports | no data | 4 |
| Integrated IDE | no data | - |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 4 |
| Integrated LAN | no data | - |
| UART | 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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.47 | 0.43 |
| Integrated graphics card | 0.66 | 0.77 |
| Recency | 14 June 2011 | 1 December 2013 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 11 Watt |
A4-3305M has a 9.3% higher aggregate performance score.
Celeron 2961Y, on the other hand, has 16.7% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 2 years, a 45.5% more advanced lithography process, and 218.2% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A4-3305M and Celeron 2961Y.
Should you still have questions on choice between A4-3305M and Celeron 2961Y, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
