Celeron 827E vs A6-9220
Aggregate performance score
A6-9220 outperforms Celeron 827E by a whopping 248% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A6-9220 and Celeron 827E processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2613 | 3186 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Bristol Ridge | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | 5.05 | 1.28 |
| Architecture codename | Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) |
| Release date | 1 June 2016 (8 years ago) | no data |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $89 |
Detailed specifications
A6-9220 and Celeron 827E 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 2.5 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2.9 GHz | 1.4 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 2.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 5 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 14 |
| L1 cache | 160 KB | 64 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 256 KB |
| L3 cache | no data | 1.5 MB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 124.5 mm2 | 131 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1200 Million | 504 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on A6-9220 and Celeron 827E 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 | no data | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | BGA | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10-15 Watt | 17 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-9220 and Celeron 827E. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Virtualization, | no data |
| FMA | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-9220 and Celeron 827E are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-9220 and Celeron 827E. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR3-1066 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 16 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 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 Compare | AMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) ( - 655 MHz) | Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) |
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 | 0.80 | 0.23 |
| Integrated graphics card | 1.17 | 0.34 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 17 Watt |
A6-9220 has a 247.8% higher aggregate performance score, 244.1% faster integrated GPU, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 70% lower power consumption.
The A6-9220 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 827E in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between A6-9220 and Celeron 827E, 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.
