Celeron T3500 vs A8-3500M

VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-3500M
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
0.88
+83.3%

A8-3500M outperforms Celeron T3500 by an impressive 83% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A8-3500M and Celeron T3500 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25612913
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-Seriesno data
Power efficiency2.381.30
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)no data
Release date14 June 2011 (13 years ago)1 July 2010 (14 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A8-3500M and Celeron T3500 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)no data
Threads4no data
Base clock speed1.5 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHzno data
L1 cache128 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache1 MB (per core)no data
L3 cache0 KB1 MB
Chip lithography32 nm45 nm
Die size228 mm2no data
Number of transistors1,178 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A8-3500M and Celeron T3500 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 configuration1no data
SocketFS1PGA478
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-3500M and Celeron T3500. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6620Gno data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-3500M and Celeron T3500 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-3500M and Celeron T3500. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon HD 6620G (444 MHz)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.

A8-3500M 0.88
+83.3%
Celeron T3500 0.48

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.

A8-3500M 1400
+83.7%
Celeron T3500 762

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.

A8-3500M 231
Celeron T3500 236
+2.2%

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.

A8-3500M 620
+77.1%
Celeron T3500 350

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.88 0.48
Recency 14 June 2011 1 July 2010
Chip lithography 32 nm 45 nm

A8-3500M has a 83.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 months, and a 40.6% more advanced lithography process.

The A8-3500M is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron T3500 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A8-3500M and Celeron T3500, 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 A8-3500M
A8-3500M
Intel Celeron T3500
Celeron T3500

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.


3.6 118 votes

Rate A8-3500M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 8 votes

Rate Celeron T3500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A8-3500M or Celeron T3500, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.