A4-3300M vs Celeron Dual-Core T3100
Aggregated performance score
A4-3300M outperforms Celeron Dual-Core T3100 by 1% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
General info
Comparing Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and A4-3300M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2513 | 2506 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron Dual-Core | AMD A-Series |
| Architecture codename | Penryn (2008−2011) | Llano (2011−2012) |
| Release date | 1 September 2009 (14 years old) | 14 June 2011 (12 years old) |
| Current price | $32 | $61 |
Technical specs
Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and A4-3300M 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.9 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.9 GHz | 2.5 GHz |
| Bus support | 800 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 107 mm2 | 228 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 410 Million | 1,178 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and A4-3300M 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 | no data | 1 |
| Socket | BGA479, PGA478 | FS1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and A4-3300M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | 3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, DDR3 Memory Controller, Radeon HD 6480G |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and A4-3300M are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and A4-3300M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon HD 6480G |
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.
A4-3300M outperforms Celeron Dual-Core T3100 by 1% 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%
A4-3300M outperforms Celeron Dual-Core T3100 by 1% 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 Dual-Core T3100 outperforms A4-3300M by 9% 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 Dual-Core T3100 outperforms A4-3300M by 9% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Celeron Dual-Core T3100 outperforms A4-3300M by 8% in 3DMark06 CPU.
Advantages and disadvantages
| Performance score | 0.76 | 0.77 |
| Recency | 1 September 2009 | 14 June 2011 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 32 nm |
We couldn't decide between Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and A4-3300M. The differences in performance seem too small.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron Dual-Core T3100 and A4-3300M, 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.
