Celeron N2930 vs A4 Micro-6400T

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A4 Micro-6400T
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 4 Watt
0.68
+6.3%
Celeron N2930
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 7 Watt
0.64

A4 Micro-6400T outperforms Celeron N2930 by a small 6% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron N2930 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking27392771
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-SeriesIntel Celeron
Power efficiency14.308.65
Architecture codenameMullins (2014)Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
Release date29 April 2014 (10 years ago)23 February 2014 (10 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron N2930 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed1 GHz1.83 GHz
Boost clock speed1.6 GHz2.16 GHz
L1 cacheno data56K (per core)
L2 cache2048 KB512K (per core)
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography28 nm22 nm
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron N2930 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
SocketFT3bFCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)4.5 Watt7.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron N2930. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVXno data
AES-NI+-
FMAFMA4-
AVX+-
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
VirusProtect+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Smart Connectno data+
RSTno data-

Security technologies

A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron N2930 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron N2930 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+
IOMMU 2.0+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron N2930. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1333DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channels12

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R3 GraphicsIntel HD Graphics for Intel Atom Processor Z3700 Series
Quick Sync Video-+
Enduro+-
Switchable graphics+-
UVD+-
VCE+-
Graphics max frequencyno data854 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron N2930 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron N2930 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron N2930.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanesno data4
USB revisionno data3.0 and 2.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data5

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 Micro-6400T 0.68
+6.3%
Celeron N2930 0.64

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.

A4 Micro-6400T 1082
+6.4%
Celeron N2930 1017

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.

A4 Micro-6400T 1251
+10.6%
Celeron N2930 1132

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.

A4 Micro-6400T 3380
Celeron N2930 3880
+14.8%

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.

A4 Micro-6400T 1664
Celeron N2930 2214
+33.1%

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.

A4 Micro-6400T 46.27
Celeron N2930 27.25
+69.8%

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.

A4 Micro-6400T 1
Celeron N2930 2
+35.3%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

A4 Micro-6400T 95
Celeron N2930 129
+35.8%

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.

A4 Micro-6400T 34
Celeron N2930 35
+2.9%

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.

A4 Micro-6400T 0.41
Celeron N2930 0.41

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.

A4 Micro-6400T 0.7
+200%
Celeron N2930 0.2

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.

A4 Micro-6400T 820
Celeron N2930 1181
+44%

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.  

A4 Micro-6400T 7
Celeron N2930 9
+34.8%

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.  

A4 Micro-6400T 34
Celeron N2930 47
+40.1%

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

A4 Micro-6400T 2239
Celeron N2930 2703
+20.7%

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

A4 Micro-6400T 882
+5.1%
Celeron N2930 839

Geekbench 2

A4 Micro-6400T 2676
Celeron N2930 2968
+10.9%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.68 0.64
Recency 29 April 2014 23 February 2014
Chip lithography 28 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 4 Watt 7 Watt

A4 Micro-6400T has a 6.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 months, and 75% lower power consumption.

Celeron N2930, on the other hand, has a 27.3% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron N2930.


Should you still have questions on choice between A4 Micro-6400T and Celeron N2930, 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.


AMD A4 Micro-6400T
A4 Micro-6400T
Intel Celeron N2930
Celeron N2930

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.


5 1 vote

Rate A4 Micro-6400T on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 56 votes

Rate Celeron N2930 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A4 Micro-6400T or Celeron N2930, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.