Celeron 847E vs A4 PRO-3340B
Aggregate performance score
A4 PRO-3340B outperforms Celeron 847E by a whopping 194% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2704 | 3334 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.01 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | 1.65 | 0.83 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | GlobalFoundries | no data |
| Architecture codename | Kabini (2013−2014) | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) |
| Release date | 20 December 2014 (11 years ago) | no data |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $111 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
A4 PRO-3340B and Celeron 847E 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.2 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 1.1 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 2.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 5 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 11 |
| L1 cache | no data | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 2048 KB | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | no data | 2 MB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 107 mm2 | 131 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 90 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 504 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on A4 PRO-3340B and Celeron 847E 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 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | FT3 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 17 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A4 PRO-3340B and Celeron 847E. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | - |
| FMA | FMA4 | + |
| AVX | + | - |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| PowerGating | + | - |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
| RAID | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A4 PRO-3340B and Celeron 847E are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| IOMMU 2.0 | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A4 PRO-3340B and Celeron 847E. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3/DDR3L-1600 | DDR3-1333 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 16 GB |
| Max memory channels | 1 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 21.335 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon™ HD 8240 Graphics | Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) |
| iGPU core count | 2 | no data |
| จำนวนพาธไลน์ | 128 | no data |
| Enduro | + | - |
| Switchable graphics | + | - |
| UVD | + | - |
| VCE | + | - |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of A4 PRO-3340B and Celeron 847E integrated GPUs.
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by A4 PRO-3340B and Celeron 847E integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | no data |
| Vulkan | + | - |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A4 PRO-3340B and Celeron 847E.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 8 | no data |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.97 | 0.33 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 17 Watt |
A4 PRO-3340B has a 193.9% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.
Celeron 847E, on the other hand, has 47.1% lower power consumption.
The AMD A4 PRO-3340B is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron 847E in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
