A10-6700 vs Celeron Dual-Core T3100

Aggregate performance score

Celeron Dual-Core T3100
2009
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.77

A10-6700 outperforms Celeron Dual-Core T3100 by a whopping 164% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and A10-6700 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26611934
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Celeron Dual-Coreno data
Power efficiency2.012.85
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Richland (2013−2014)
Release date1 September 2009 (15 years ago)1 June 2013 (11 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and A10-6700 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speedno data3.7 GHz
Boost clock speed1.9 GHz4.3 GHz
Bus rate800 MHzno data
L1 cache128 KB192 KB
L2 cache1 MB4096 KB
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm32 nm
Die size107 mm2246 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C71 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data71 °C
Number of transistors410 Million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and A10-6700 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 configurationno data1
SocketBGA479, PGA478FM2
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and A10-6700. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
FMA-FMA4
AVX-AVX
PowerNow-+
PowerGating-+
VirusProtect-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and A10-6700 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
IOMMU 2.0-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and A10-6700. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3-1866
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon HD 8670D
Number of pipelinesno data384
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and A10-6700 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and A10-6700 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 11

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and A10-6700.

PCIe versionno data2.0

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 Dual-Core T3100 0.77
A10-6700 2.03
+164%

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.

Celeron Dual-Core T3100 1174
A10-6700 3105
+164%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.77 2.03
Recency 1 September 2009 1 June 2013
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 45 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 65 Watt

Celeron Dual-Core T3100 has 85.7% lower power consumption.

A10-6700, on the other hand, has a 163.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 40.6% more advanced lithography process.

The A10-6700 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron Dual-Core T3100 in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron Dual-Core T3100 is a notebook processor while A10-6700 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and A10-6700, 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 Dual-Core T3100
Celeron Dual-Core T3100
AMD A10-6700
A10-6700

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.


3.5 33 votes

Rate Celeron Dual-Core T3100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 242 votes

Rate A10-6700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron Dual-Core T3100 or A10-6700, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.