Celeron M 743 vs A6-9220
Primary details
Comparing A6-9220 and Celeron M 743 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2588 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Bristol Ridge | Intel Celeron M |
| Power efficiency | 5.11 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) | Penryn (2008−2011) |
| Release date | 1 June 2016 (8 years ago) | 1 September 2009 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $107 |
Detailed specifications
A6-9220 and Celeron M 743 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 | 1.3 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 800 MHz |
| L1 cache | 160 KB | 64 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 124.5 mm2 | 107 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1200 Million | 410 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on A6-9220 and Celeron M 743 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.
| Socket | BGA | BGA965 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10-15 Watt | 10 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-9220 and Celeron M 743. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Virtualization, | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-9220 and Celeron M 743 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-9220 and Celeron M 743. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) | 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.
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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 June 2016 | 1 September 2009 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 45 nm |
A6-9220 has an age advantage of 6 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 60.7% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between A6-9220 and Celeron M 743. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between A6-9220 and Celeron M 743, 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.
