Celeron B830 vs A6-3400M

VS

Aggregate performance score

A6-3400M
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
0.75
+38.9%
Celeron B830
2012
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.54

A6-3400M outperforms Celeron B830 by a substantial 39% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A6-3400M and Celeron B830 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26682852
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-SeriesIntel Celeron
Power efficiency2.031.46
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
Release date14 June 2011 (13 years ago)1 September 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$86

Detailed specifications

A6-3400M and Celeron B830 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 speed1.4 GHz1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.3 GHz1.8 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 2.0
Bus rateno data4 × 5 GT/s
Multiplierno data18
L1 cache128 KB (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)256K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size228 mm2131 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistors1,178 million504 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A6-3400M and Celeron B830 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFS1FCPGA988,PGA988
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-3400M and Celeron B830. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6480GIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
FMA-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
My WiFino data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+

Security technologies

A6-3400M and Celeron B830 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 A6-3400M and Celeron B830 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-3400M and Celeron B830. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data16 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data21.335 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 6520G (400 MHz)Intel HD Graphics for 2nd Generation Intel Processors
Graphics max frequencyno data1.05 GHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A6-3400M and Celeron B830 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
SDVOno data+
CRTno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A6-3400M and Celeron B830.

PCIe versionno data2.0
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.

A6-3400M 0.75
+38.9%
Celeron B830 0.54

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.

A6-3400M 1193
+38.4%
Celeron B830 862

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.

A6-3400M 211
Celeron B830 259
+22.7%

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.

A6-3400M 522
+16.3%
Celeron B830 449

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.75 0.54
Integrated graphics card 0.78 0.77
Recency 14 June 2011 1 September 2012
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2

A6-3400M has a 38.9% higher aggregate performance score, 1.3% faster integrated GPU, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Celeron B830, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year.

The A6-3400M is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron B830 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A6-3400M and Celeron B830, 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 A6-3400M
A6-3400M
Intel Celeron B830
Celeron B830

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.


3.6 174 votes

Rate A6-3400M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 91 vote

Rate Celeron B830 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A6-3400M or Celeron B830, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.