Celeron 560 vs A4-9120C
Aggregate performance score
A4-9120C outperforms Celeron 560 by a whopping 157% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A4-9120C and Celeron 560 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2858 | 3212 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Bristol Ridge | no data |
| Power efficiency | 8.52 | 0.64 |
| Architecture codename | Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) | no data |
| Release date | 6 January 2019 (5 years ago) | 1 January 2008 (16 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
A4-9120C and Celeron 560 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) | no data |
| Threads | 2 | no data |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.13 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.6 GHz | no data |
| Multiplier | 16 | no data |
| L1 cache | 160 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | no data |
| L3 cache | no data | 1 MB L2 Cache |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | 124.5 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1200 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 0.95V-1.3V |
Compatibility
Information on A4-9120C and Celeron 560 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.
| Socket | BGA | PPGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 31 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A4-9120C and Celeron 560. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Virtualization, | no data |
| 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 | - |
Security technologies
A4-9120C and Celeron 560 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 A4-9120C and Celeron 560 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-x | no data | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A4-9120C and Celeron 560. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 14.936 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) ( - 600 MHz) | 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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.54 | 0.21 |
| Recency | 6 January 2019 | 1 January 2008 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 31 Watt |
A4-9120C has a 157.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, a 132.1% more advanced lithography process, and 416.7% lower power consumption.
The A4-9120C is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 560 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between A4-9120C and Celeron 560, 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.
