Celeron N3060 vs A4-7300
Primary details
Comparing A4-7300 and Celeron N3060 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2377 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Architecture codename | Richland (2013−2014) | Braswell (2015−2016) |
| Release date | August 2014 (9 years ago) | 15 January 2016 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $107 |
| Current price | $45 | $243 (2.3x MSRP) |
Detailed specifications
A4-7300 and Celeron N3060 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 | 3.8 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4 GHz | 2.48 GHz |
| L1 cache | 96 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 1024 KB | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 70 °C | 90 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 70 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,303 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on A4-7300 and Celeron N3060 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 | FM2 | FCBGA1170 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 6 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A4-7300 and Celeron N3060. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | no data |
| AVX | + | no data |
| PowerTune | - | no data |
| TrueAudio | - | no data |
| PowerNow | + | no data |
| PowerGating | + | no data |
| Out-of-band client management | - | no data |
| VirusProtect | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | no data | + |
| SIPP | no data | - |
| Smart Response | no data | - |
| GPIO | no data | + |
| Smart Connect | no data | - |
| Status | no data | Launched |
| HD Audio | no data | + |
| RST | no data | - |
Security technologies
A4-7300 and Celeron N3060 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Boot | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| Identity Protection | no data | + |
| OS Guard | no data | - |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A4-7300 and Celeron N3060 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | no data |
| VT-d | no data | - |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| VT-i | no data | - |
| EPT | no data | + |
| IOMMU 2.0 | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A4-7300 and Celeron N3060. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3-1600 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC memory support | no data | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon HD 8470D | Intel HD Graphics 400 (Braswell) |
| Number of pipelines | 192 | no data |
| Max video memory | no data | 8 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | no data | + |
| Clear Video | no data | + |
| Clear Video HD | no data | + |
| Enduro | + | no data |
| Switchable graphics | 1 | no data |
| UVD | + | no data |
| VCE | + | no data |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 600 MHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 12 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of A4-7300 and Celeron N3060 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | + | + |
| HDMI | + | + |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by A4-7300 and Celeron N3060 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | DirectX® 11 | + |
| OpenGL | no data | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A4-7300 and Celeron N3060.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 4 |
| USB revision | no data | 2.0/3.0 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 2 |
| Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports | no data | 2 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 5 |
| 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.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
A4-7300 outperforms Celeron N3060 by 131% in Passmark.
Pros & cons summary
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 6 Watt |
We couldn't decide between A4-7300 and Celeron N3060. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that A4-7300 is a desktop processor while Celeron N3060 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between A4-7300 and Celeron N3060, 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.
