Celeron 3965Y vs A6-3400M

VS

Aggregate performance score

A6-3400M
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
0.75
Celeron 3965Y
2017
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
0.75

Primary details

Comparing A6-3400M and Celeron 3965Y processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26502647
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-SeriesIntel Celeron
Power efficiency2.0211.78
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Kaby Lake (2016−2019)
Release date14 June 2011 (13 years ago)21 April 2017 (7 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A6-3400M and Celeron 3965Y 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed1.4 GHz1.5 GHz
Boost clock speed2.3 GHz1.3 GHz
Bus typeno dataOPI
Bus rateno data4 GT/s
Multiplierno data13
L1 cache128 KB (per core)128 KB
L2 cache1 MB (per core)512 KB
L3 cache0 KB2 MB
Chip lithography32 nm14 nm
Die size228 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistors1,178 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A6-3400M and Celeron 3965Y 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 configuration11 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFS1FCBGA1515
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-3400M and Celeron 3965Y. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6480GIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data+
My WiFino data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
Smart Responseno data+

Security technologies

A6-3400M and Celeron 3965Y technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
MPX-+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® ME
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-3400M and Celeron 3965Y are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-3400M and Celeron 3965Y. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data16 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data34.134 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 6520GIntel HD Graphics 615
Max video memoryno data16 GB
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data850 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A6-3400M and Celeron 3965Y integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
DVIno data+

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by A6-3400M and Celeron 3965Y integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution supportno data+
Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096x2304@24Hz
Max resolution over eDPno data4096x2304@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data4096x2304@60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A6-3400M and Celeron 3965Y integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12
OpenGLno data4.4

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A6-3400M and Celeron 3965Y.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

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.

A6-3400M 0.75
Celeron 3965Y 0.75

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.

A6-3400M 1191
Celeron 3965Y 1194
+0.3%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

A6-3400M 211
Celeron 3965Y 321
+52.1%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

A6-3400M 522
Celeron 3965Y 565
+8.2%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Integrated graphics card 0.78 1.87
Recency 14 June 2011 21 April 2017
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 6 Watt

A6-3400M has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Celeron 3965Y, on the other hand, has 139.7% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 5 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 483.3% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A6-3400M and Celeron 3965Y.


Should you still have questions on choice between A6-3400M and Celeron 3965Y, 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 A6-3400M
A6-3400M
Intel Celeron 3965Y
Celeron 3965Y

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.


3.6 171 vote

Rate A6-3400M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.9 30 votes

Rate Celeron 3965Y on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A6-3400M or Celeron 3965Y, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.