Celeron N2940 vs A6-4400M

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

A6-4400M
2012
2 cores / 2 threads
0.65

Celeron N2940 outperforms A6-4400M by 3% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A6-4400M and Celeron N2940 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking26262606
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-SeriesIntel Celeron
Architecture codenameTrinity (2012−2013)Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
Release date15 May 2012 (11 years ago)22 May 2014 (9 years ago)
Current price$95 $377

Detailed specifications

A6-4400M and Celeron N2940 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed2.7 GHz1.83 GHz
Boost clock speed3.2 GHz2.25 GHz
L1 cache96 KB224 KB
L2 cache1 MB2 MB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm22 nm
Die size246 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistors1303 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on A6-4400M and Celeron N2940 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
SocketFS1r2FCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt7.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-4400M and Celeron N2940. 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, FMAno data
AES-NI+-
FMA+no data
AVX+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Smart Connectno data+
Statusno dataDiscontinued

Security technologies

A6-4400M and Celeron N2940 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-4400M and Celeron N2940 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+no data
VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-4400M and Celeron N2940. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesunknownDDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data21.32 GB/s
ECC memory supportno data-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon HD 7520GIntel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Series
Quick Sync Videono data+
Graphics max frequencyno data854 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A6-4400M and Celeron N2940 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A6-4400M and Celeron N2940.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data4
USB revisionno data3.0 and 2.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data5

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.

A6-4400M 0.65
Celeron N2940 0.67
+3.1%

Celeron N2940 outperforms A6-4400M by 3% 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%

A6-4400M 1007
Celeron N2940 1039
+3.2%

Celeron N2940 outperforms A6-4400M by 3% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

A6-4400M 320
+92.8%
Celeron N2940 166

A6-4400M outperforms Celeron N2940 by 93% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

A6-4400M 407
Celeron N2940 493
+21.1%

Celeron N2940 outperforms A6-4400M by 21% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

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%

A6-4400M 2292
+99.3%
Celeron N2940 1150

A6-4400M outperforms Celeron N2940 by 99% 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%

A6-4400M 3407
Celeron N2940 3958
+16.2%

Celeron N2940 outperforms A6-4400M by 16% 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%

A6-4400M 1804
Celeron N2940 2191
+21.5%

Celeron N2940 outperforms A6-4400M by 21% 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%

A6-4400M 46.82
Celeron N2940 29.2
+60.3%

A6-4400M outperforms Celeron N2940 by 60% 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%

A6-4400M 1
Celeron N2940 2
+41.6%

Celeron N2940 outperforms A6-4400M by 42% 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%

A6-4400M 0.8
+90.5%
Celeron N2940 0.42

A6-4400M outperforms Celeron N2940 by 90% 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%

A6-4400M 0.7
+175%
Celeron N2940 0.2

A6-4400M outperforms Celeron N2940 by 175% in TrueCrypt AES.

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%

A6-4400M 39
Celeron N2940 47
+21%

Celeron N2940 outperforms A6-4400M by 21% 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%

A6-4400M 8
Celeron N2940 9
+23.3%

Celeron N2940 outperforms A6-4400M by 23% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.65 0.67
Recency 15 May 2012 22 May 2014
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 32 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 7 Watt

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A6-4400M and Celeron N2940.


Should you still have questions on choice between A6-4400M and Celeron N2940, 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 A6-4400M
A6-4400M
Intel Celeron N2940
Celeron N2940

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.


3.3 169 votes

Rate A6-4400M on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate Celeron N2940 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A6-4400M or Celeron N2940, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.