Celeron 1000M vs A4 Micro-6400T

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

A4 Micro-6400T
2014
4 cores / 4 threads
0.70
+1.4%
Celeron 1000M
2013
2 cores / 2 threads
0.69

A4 Micro-6400T outperforms Celeron 1000M by 1% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

General info

Comparing A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron 1000M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking25762585
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-SeriesIntel Celeron
Architecture codenameMullins (2014)Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
Release date29 April 2014 (9 years ago)20 January 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$86
Current price$340 $219 (2.5x MSRP)

Technical specs

A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron 1000M 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed1 GHz1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed1.6 GHz1.8 GHz
L1 cacheno data64K (per core)
L2 cache2048 KB256K (per core)
L3 cacheno data2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm22 nm
Die sizeno data118 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data105 °C
Number of transistorsno data1,400 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron 1000M 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 configurationno data1
SocketFT3bFCPGA988
Power consumption (TDP)4.5 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron 1000M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, Single-Channel DDR3L-1333aIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI+-
FMAFMA4no 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+
My WiFino data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoringno data+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+
Statusno dataDiscontinued

Security technologies

A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron 1000M technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron 1000M are enumerated here.

AMD-V1no data
VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+
IOMMU 2.0+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron 1000M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1333DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channels12
Maximum memory bandwidthno data25.6 GB/s
ECC memory supportno data-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R3 GraphicsIntel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® Processors
Enduro+no data
Switchable graphics1no data
UVD+no data
VCE+no data
Graphics max frequencyno data1 GHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron 1000M integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
SDVOno data+
CRTno data+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron 1000M integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan1no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron 1000M.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

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 Micro-6400T 0.70
+1.4%
Celeron 1000M 0.69

A4 Micro-6400T outperforms Celeron 1000M by 1% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


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 Micro-6400T 1082
+0.7%
Celeron 1000M 1074

A4 Micro-6400T outperforms Celeron 1000M by 1% in Passmark.

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

A4 Micro-6400T 1251
Celeron 1000M 2480
+98.2%

Celeron 1000M outperforms A4 Micro-6400T by 98% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

A4 Micro-6400T 3380
Celeron 1000M 4757
+40.7%

Celeron 1000M outperforms A4 Micro-6400T by 41% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

A4 Micro-6400T 1664
Celeron 1000M 1923
+15.6%

Celeron 1000M outperforms A4 Micro-6400T by 16% in 3DMark06 CPU.

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

A4 Micro-6400T 46.27
Celeron 1000M 41.63
+11.1%

A4 Micro-6400T outperforms Celeron 1000M by 11% in wPrime 32.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

A4 Micro-6400T 1
Celeron 1000M 1
+25.9%

Celeron 1000M outperforms A4 Micro-6400T by 26% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

A4 Micro-6400T 0.41
Celeron 1000M 0.74
+80.5%

Celeron 1000M outperforms A4 Micro-6400T by 80% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A4 Micro-6400T 0.7
+350%
Celeron 1000M 0.2

A4 Micro-6400T outperforms Celeron 1000M by 350% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A4 Micro-6400T 820
Celeron 1000M 1285
+56.7%

Celeron 1000M outperforms A4 Micro-6400T by 57% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A4 Micro-6400T 34
Celeron 1000M 47
+41%

Celeron 1000M outperforms A4 Micro-6400T by 41% in x264 encoding pass 1.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A4 Micro-6400T 7
Celeron 1000M 8
+23%

Celeron 1000M outperforms A4 Micro-6400T by 23% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Geekbench 2

Benchmark coverage: 5%

A4 Micro-6400T 2676
Celeron 1000M 3405
+27.2%

Celeron 1000M outperforms A4 Micro-6400T by 27% in Geekbench 2.

Gaming performance

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 0.70 0.69
Recency 29 April 2014 20 January 2013
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 28 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 4 Watt 35 Watt

We couldn't decide between A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron 1000M. The differences in performance seem too small.


Should you still have questions on choice between A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron 1000M, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD A4 Micro-6400T
A4 Micro-6400T
Intel Celeron 1000M
Celeron 1000M

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.

User Ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


5 1 vote

Rate A4 Micro-6400T on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 153 votes

Rate Celeron 1000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about A4 Micro-6400T or Celeron 1000M, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.