A10-5750M vs Celeron N6211

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron N6211
2022
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
1.47
+3.5%

Celeron N6211 outperforms A10-5750M by a minimal 4% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N6211 and A10-5750M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking21932225
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.33no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesElkhart LakeAMD A-Series
Power efficiency20.623.70
Architecture codenameElkhart Lake (2022)Richland (2013−2014)
Release date17 July 2022 (2 years ago)1 June 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$54no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron N6211 and A10-5750M 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 speed1.2 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed3 GHz3.5 GHz
L1 cacheno data128 KB (per core)
L2 cache1.5 MB1 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography10 nm32 nm
Die sizeno data246 mm2
Maximum core temperature70 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data71 °C
Number of transistorsno data1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N6211 and A10-5750M 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
SocketBGA1493FS1r2
Power consumption (TDP)6.5 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N6211 and A10-5750M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno data86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, FMA
AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N6211 and A10-5750M are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N6211 and A10-5750M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU)AMD Radeon HD 8650G

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 N6211 1.47
+3.5%
A10-5750M 1.42

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 N6211 2245
+3.3%
A10-5750M 2174

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 N6211 2696
+4.5%
A10-5750M 2579

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.

Celeron N6211 4693
A10-5750M 6451
+37.5%

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.

Celeron N6211 49.66
A10-5750M 22.5
+121%

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Celeron N6211 2
A10-5750M 2
+40%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Celeron N6211 128
A10-5750M 209
+63.3%

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Celeron N6211 76
A10-5750M 76

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Celeron N6211 0.97
+14.1%
A10-5750M 0.85

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.

Celeron N6211 1
A10-5750M 1.5
+53.1%

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.  

Celeron N6211 10
A10-5750M 15
+50%

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.  

Celeron N6211 45
A10-5750M 76
+68%

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.

Celeron N6211 731
A10-5750M 2035
+178%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.47 1.42
Integrated graphics card 1.39 1.36
Recency 17 July 2022 1 June 2013
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 10 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 35 Watt

Celeron N6211 has a 3.5% higher aggregate performance score, 2.2% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 9 years, a 220% more advanced lithography process, and 483.3% lower power consumption.

A10-5750M, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Celeron N6211 and A10-5750M.

Note that Celeron N6211 is a desktop processor while A10-5750M is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N6211 and A10-5750M, 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 N6211
Celeron N6211
AMD A10-5750M
A10-5750M

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.


2.3 4 votes

Rate Celeron N6211 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 251 vote

Rate A10-5750M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N6211 or A10-5750M, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.