Celeron 2.60 vs A8-4500M
Aggregate performance score
A8-4500M outperforms Celeron 2.60 by a whopping 1113% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2748 | 3716 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD A-Series | no data |
| Power efficiency | 1.17 | 0.05 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Trinity (2012−2013) | Northwood (2002−2004) |
| Release date | 15 May 2012 (13 years ago) | June 2003 (22 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
A8-4500M and Celeron 2.60 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 1.9 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 2.6 GHz |
| L1 cache | 192 KB | 8 KB |
| L2 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 128 KB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 130 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | 146 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 55 million |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on A8-4500M and Celeron 2.60 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 |
| Socket | FS1r2 | 478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 73 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-4500M and Celeron 2.60. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, FMA | no data |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-4500M and Celeron 2.60 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-4500M and Celeron 2.60. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | unknown | DDR1, DDR2 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon HD 7640G (496 - 685 MHz) | no data |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.97 | 0.08 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 1 |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 73 Watt |
A8-4500M has a 1113% higher aggregate performance score, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 306% more advanced lithography process, and 109% lower power consumption.
The AMD A8-4500M is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Celeron 2.60 in performance tests.
Be aware that A8-4500M is a notebook processor while Celeron 2.60 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
