Athlon 300U vs Celeron M 420

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 420 and Athlon 300U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated1737
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesCeleron MAMD Athlon
Power efficiencyno data15.35
Architecture codenameYonah (2005−2006)Raven Ridge 2 (2019)
Release dateno data6 January 2019 (5 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 420 and Athlon 300U 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 cores1 (Single-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads14
Base clock speed1.6 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed1.6 GHz3.3 GHz
Bus typeno dataPCIe 3.0
Bus rate533 MHzno data
Multiplierno data24
L1 cacheno data128K (per core)
L2 cacheno data512K (per core)
L3 cache1 MB L2 KB4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography65 nm14 nm
Die sizeno data209.78 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data4940 Million
64 bit support-+
Windows 11 compatibility-+
VID voltage range1.0V-1.3Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 420 and Athlon 300U 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketPPGA478FP5
Power consumption (TDP)27 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 420 and Athlon 300U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataXFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMT
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States-no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
FSB parity-no data
StatusDiscontinuedno data

Security technologies

Celeron M 420 and Athlon 300U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 420 and Athlon 300U are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x-no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 420 and Athlon 300U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4 Dual-channel
Maximum memory sizeno data64 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data38.397 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon RX Vega 3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 420 and Athlon 300U.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data12

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


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 M 420 139
Athlon 300U 3867
+2682%

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.

Celeron M 420 1277
Athlon 300U 3968
+211%

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 1 2
Threads 1 4
Chip lithography 65 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 27 Watt 15 Watt

Athlon 300U has 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 80% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron M 420 and Athlon 300U. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 420 and Athlon 300U, 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 M 420
Celeron M 420
AMD Athlon 300U
Athlon 300U

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.


4.2 80 votes

Rate Celeron M 420 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.1 456 votes

Rate Athlon 300U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 420 or Athlon 300U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.