A9-9420e vs Celeron N2930
Aggregate performance score
A9-9420e outperforms Celeron N2930 by a small 9% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron N2930 and A9-9420e processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2771 | 2721 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Celeron | AMD Bristol Ridge |
| Power efficiency | 8.61 | 4.39 |
| Architecture codename | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) | Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) |
| Release date | 23 February 2014 (10 years ago) | 1 June 2018 (6 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron N2930 and A9-9420e 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 1.83 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2.16 GHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 56K (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 28 nm |
| Die size | no data | 124.5 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | 90 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 1200 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron N2930 and A9-9420e 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 | no data |
| Socket | FCBGA1170 | BGA |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 7.5 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N2930 and A9-9420e. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Virtualization, |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Smart Connect | + | no data |
| RST | - | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron N2930 and A9-9420e technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | + | no data |
| Secure Key | + | no data |
| Anti-Theft | - | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N2930 and A9-9420e are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | - | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N2930 and A9-9420e. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel HD Graphics for Intel Atom Processor Z3700 Series | AMD Radeon R5 (Stoney Ridge) |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Graphics max frequency | 854 MHz | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N2930 and A9-9420e integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 2 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N2930 and A9-9420e.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 4 | no data |
| USB revision | 3.0 and 2.0 | no data |
| Total number of SATA ports | 2 | no data |
| Number of USB ports | 5 | no 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.
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.
Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.64 | 0.70 |
| Integrated graphics card | 0.77 | 1.48 |
| Recency | 23 February 2014 | 1 June 2018 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 7 Watt | 15 Watt |
Celeron N2930 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 27.3% more advanced lithography process, and 114.3% lower power consumption.
A9-9420e, on the other hand, has a 9.4% higher aggregate performance score, 92.2% faster integrated GPU, and an age advantage of 4 years.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Celeron N2930 and A9-9420e.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N2930 and A9-9420e, 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.
