Celeron N3350 vs A6-7480
Aggregate performance score
A6-7480 outperforms Celeron N3350 by an impressive 67% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A6-7480 and Celeron N3350 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2339 | 2676 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Architecture codename | Carrizo (2015−2018) | Apollo Lake (2014−2016) |
| Release date | 26 October 2018 (5 years ago) | 30 August 2016 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $24 |
Detailed specifications
A6-7480 and Celeron N3350 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 | 3.5 GHz | 1.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 11 |
| L1 cache | 160K | no data |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (shared) | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 250 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | 3,100 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on A6-7480 and Celeron N3350 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 | FM2+ | FCBGA1296 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 6 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-7480 and Celeron N3350. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Smart Response | no data | - |
| GPIO | no data | + |
| Smart Connect | no data | - |
| Status | no data | Launched |
| HD Audio | no data | + |
| RST | no data | - |
Security technologies
A6-7480 and Celeron N3350 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 | + |
| MPX | - | + |
| Identity Protection | - | + |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-7480 and Celeron N3350 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| VT-i | no data | - |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-7480 and Celeron N3350. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3-2133 | DDR3, DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Radeon R5 | Intel HD Graphics 500 |
| Max video memory | no data | 8 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Clear Video | no data | + |
| Clear Video HD | no data | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 650 MHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 12 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of A6-7480 and Celeron N3350 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | - | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
| MIPI-DSI | no data | + |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by A6-7480 and Celeron N3350 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | + |
| OpenGL | no data | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A6-7480 and Celeron N3350.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 6 |
| 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 | 8 |
| 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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.20 | 0.72 |
| Recency | 26 October 2018 | 30 August 2016 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 6 Watt |
A6-7480 has a 66.7% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 2 years.
Celeron N3350, on the other hand, has a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 650% lower power consumption.
The A6-7480 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N3350 in performance tests.
Note that A6-7480 is a desktop processor while Celeron N3350 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between A6-7480 and Celeron N3350, 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.
