A6-9220e vs Celeron 1000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 1000M
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.69
+9.5%

Celeron 1000M outperforms A6-9220e by a moderate 10% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 1000M and A6-9220e processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking26082663
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD Bristol Ridge
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date20 January 2013 (11 years ago)1 June 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$86no data
Current price$219 (2.5x MSRP)$308

Detailed specifications

Celeron 1000M and A6-9220e 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speed1.8 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed1.8 GHz2.4 GHz
L1 cache64K (per core)160 KB
L2 cache256K (per core)1 MB
L3 cache2 MB (shared)no data
Chip lithography22 nm28 nm
Die size118 mm2124.5 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)105 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,400 million1200 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 1000M and A6-9220e 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
SocketFCPGA988BGA
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 1000M and A6-9220e. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2Single-Channel DDR4-2133, Virtualization,
AES-NI-no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
My WiFi-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+no data
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
StatusDiscontinuedno data

Security technologies

Celeron 1000M and A6-9220e technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 1000M and A6-9220e are enumerated here.

AMD-Vno data+
VT-d-no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 1000M and A6-9220e. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4
Maximum memory size32 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data
ECC memory support-no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® ProcessorsAMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge)
Graphics max frequency1 GHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 1000M and A6-9220e integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+no data
HDMI+no data
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 1000M and A6-9220e.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes16no 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.

Celeron 1000M 0.69
+9.5%
A6-9220e 0.63

Celeron 1000M outperforms A6-9220e by 10% based on our aggregated benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

Celeron 1000M 1075
+10.7%
A6-9220e 971

Celeron 1000M outperforms A6-9220e by 11% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

Celeron 1000M 2480
+135%
A6-9220e 1056

Celeron 1000M outperforms A6-9220e by 135% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Celeron 1000M 4757
+173%
A6-9220e 1741

Celeron 1000M outperforms A6-9220e by 173% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

Celeron 1000M 41.63
A6-9220e 35.2
+18.3%

Celeron 1000M outperforms A6-9220e by 18% in wPrime 32.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron 1000M 0.2
A6-9220e 0.3
+113%

A6-9220e outperforms Celeron 1000M by 113% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron 1000M 1285
+148%
A6-9220e 519

Celeron 1000M outperforms A6-9220e by 148% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron 1000M 8
+220%
A6-9220e 3

Celeron 1000M outperforms A6-9220e by 220% in x264 encoding pass 2.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

Celeron 1000M 47
+221%
A6-9220e 15

Celeron 1000M outperforms A6-9220e by 221% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Geekbench 2

Benchmark coverage: 5%

Celeron 1000M 3405
+6.7%
A6-9220e 3192

Celeron 1000M outperforms A6-9220e by 7% in Geekbench 2.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.69 0.63
Recency 20 January 2013 1 June 2017
Chip lithography 22 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 6 Watt

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Celeron 1000M and A6-9220e.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 1000M and A6-9220e, 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.


Intel Celeron 1000M
Celeron 1000M
AMD A6-9220e
A6-9220e

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.


2.9 155 votes

Rate Celeron 1000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 304 votes

Rate A6-9220e on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 1000M or A6-9220e, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.