Celeron N4020 vs A4-3400

VS

Aggregate performance score

A4-3400
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.68
Celeron N4020
2019
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
0.97
+42.6%

Celeron N4020 outperforms A4-3400 by a considerable 43% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A4-3400 and Celeron N4020 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking27182476
Place by popularitynot in top-10083
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Gemini Lake
Power efficiency0.9915.30
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Gemini Lake Refresh (2019)
Release date7 September 2011 (13 years ago)4 November 2019 (5 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A4-3400 and Celeron N4020 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speed2.7 GHz1.1 GHz
Boost clock speed2.7 GHz2.8 GHz
Bus rateno data15 MHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache512 KB (per core)4 MB
L3 cache0 KB4 MB
Chip lithography32 nm14 nm
Die size228 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Number of transistors1,178 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on A4-3400 and Celeron N4020 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
SocketFM1FCBGA1090
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A4-3400 and Celeron N4020. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.2
AES-NI-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Smart Responseno data-
GPIOno data+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data-

Security technologies

A4-3400 and Celeron N4020 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
MPX-+
Identity Protection-+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® ME
OS Guardno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A4-3400 and Celeron N4020 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A4-3400 and Celeron N4020. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardRadeon HD 6410DIntel UHD Graphics 600
Max video memoryno data8 GB
Quick Sync Video-+
Graphics max frequencyno data650 MHz
Execution Unitsno data12

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A4-3400 and Celeron N4020 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
MIPI-DSIno data+

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by A4-3400 and Celeron N4020 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution supportno data+
Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096x2160@30Hz
Max resolution over eDPno data4096x2160@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data4096x2160@60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A4-3400 and Celeron N4020 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12
OpenGLno data4.4

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A4-3400 and Celeron N4020.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data6
USB revisionno data2.0/3.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data8
Integrated LANno data-
UARTno 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.

A4-3400 0.68
Celeron N4020 0.97
+42.6%

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.

A4-3400 1086
Celeron N4020 1548
+42.5%

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.

A4-3400 289
Celeron N4020 343
+18.7%

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.

A4-3400 485
Celeron N4020 547
+12.8%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.68 0.97
Recency 7 September 2011 4 November 2019
Chip lithography 32 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 6 Watt

Celeron N4020 has a 42.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 983.3% lower power consumption.

The Celeron N4020 is our recommended choice as it beats the A4-3400 in performance tests.

Note that A4-3400 is a desktop processor while Celeron N4020 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A4-3400 and Celeron N4020, 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 A4-3400
A4-3400
Intel Celeron N4020
Celeron N4020

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.


2.9 83 votes

Rate A4-3400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 1771 vote

Rate Celeron N4020 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A4-3400 or Celeron N4020, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.