Celeron 450 vs A6-3500

VS

Aggregate performance score

A6-3500
2011
3 cores / 3 threads, 65 Watt
0.89
+230%
Celeron 450
2008
1 core / 1 thread, 35 Watt
0.27

A6-3500 outperforms Celeron 450 by a whopping 230% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A6-3500 and Celeron 450 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25543141
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.300.73
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Conroe-L (2007−2008)
Release date17 August 2011 (13 years ago)August 2008 (16 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A6-3500 and Celeron 450 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 cores3 (Tri-Core)1 (Single-Core)
Threads31
Base clock speed2.1 GHz2.2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz2.2 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)64 KB
L2 cache1 MB (per core)512 KB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm65 nm
Die size228 mm277 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data60 °C
Number of transistors1,178 million105 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data1V-1.3375V

Compatibility

Information on A6-3500 and Celeron 450 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
SocketFM1LGA775
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-3500 and Celeron 450. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

A6-3500 and Celeron 450 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-3500 and Celeron 450 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-3500 and Celeron 450. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR1, DDR2, DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardRadeon HD 6530Dno 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.

A6-3500 0.89
+230%
Celeron 450 0.27

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.

A6-3500 1420
+228%
Celeron 450 433

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.

A6-3500 262
+64.8%
Celeron 450 159

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.

A6-3500 628
+290%
Celeron 450 161

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.89 0.27
Physical cores 3 1
Threads 3 1
Chip lithography 32 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 35 Watt

A6-3500 has a 229.6% higher aggregate performance score, 200% more physical cores and 200% more threads, and a 103.1% more advanced lithography process.

Celeron 450, on the other hand, has 85.7% lower power consumption.

The A6-3500 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 450 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A6-3500 and Celeron 450, 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 A6-3500
A6-3500
Intel Celeron 450
Celeron 450

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.


3.4 128 votes

Rate A6-3500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 44 votes

Rate Celeron 450 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A6-3500 or Celeron 450, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.