Celeron B810 vs A6-6310

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A6-6310
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
1.05
+114%
Celeron B810
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.49

A6-6310 outperforms Celeron B810 by a whopping 114% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A6-6310 and Celeron B810 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking24352905
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-SeriesIntel Celeron
Power efficiency6.621.32
Architecture codenameBeema (2014)Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
Release date29 April 2014 (10 years ago)1 March 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$86

Detailed specifications

A6-6310 and Celeron B810 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 speed1.8 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz1.6 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 2.0
Bus rateno data4 × 5 GT/s
Multiplierno data16
L1 cacheno data64K (per core)
L2 cache2048 KB256K (per core)
L3 cacheno data2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm32 nm
Die size107 mm2131 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistors930 Million504 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A6-6310 and Celeron B810 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFT3bPGA988
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-6310 and Celeron B810. 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, AVXIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI+-
FMAFMA4+
AVX+-
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
VirusProtect+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
My WiFino data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+

Security technologies

A6-6310 and Celeron B810 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-6310 and Celeron B810 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 A6-6310 and Celeron B810. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1865DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data16.6 GB
Max memory channels12
Maximum memory bandwidthno data21.335 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R4 GraphicsIntel HD Graphics for 2nd Generation Intel Processors
Enduro+-
Switchable graphics+-
UVD+-
VCE+-
Graphics max frequencyno data950 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A6-6310 and Celeron B810 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2
eDPno data+
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
SDVOno data+
CRTno data+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A6-6310 and Celeron B810 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A6-6310 and Celeron B810.

PCIe version2.02.0
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.

A6-6310 1.05
+114%
Celeron B810 0.49

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.

A6-6310 1675
+116%
Celeron B810 775

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.

A6-6310 229
Celeron B810 289
+26.2%

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.

A6-6310 602
+14%
Celeron B810 528

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.

A6-6310 1829
Celeron B810 2091
+14.3%

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.

A6-6310 5612
+37.6%
Celeron B810 4079

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.

A6-6310 2730
+67.2%
Celeron B810 1633

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.

A6-6310 26.64
+68%
Celeron B810 44.75

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.

A6-6310 2
+56.5%
Celeron B810 1

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.05 0.49
Recency 29 April 2014 1 March 2011
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 28 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 35 Watt

A6-6310 has a 114.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

The A6-6310 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron B810 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A6-6310 and Celeron B810, 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 A6-6310
A6-6310
Intel Celeron B810
Celeron B810

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.


3.5 243 votes

Rate A6-6310 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 5 votes

Rate Celeron B810 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A6-6310 or Celeron B810, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.