Celeron Dual-Core T3100 vs A6-9225

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A6-9225
2018
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.84
+13.5%
Celeron Dual-Core T3100
2009
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.74

A6-9225 outperforms Celeron Dual-Core T3100 by a moderate 14% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A6-9225 and Celeron Dual-Core T3100 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25852681
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Bristol RidgeIntel Celeron Dual-Core
Power efficiency5.302.00
Architecture codenameStoney Ridge (2016−2019)Penryn (2008−2011)
Release date1 June 2018 (6 years ago)1 September 2009 (15 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A6-9225 and Celeron Dual-Core T3100 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speed2.6 GHzno data
Boost clock speed3.1 GHz1.9 GHz
Bus rateno data800 MHz
L1 cache160 KB128 KB
L2 cache1 MB1 MB
Chip lithography28 nm45 nm
Die size124.5 mm2107 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °C105 °C
Number of transistors1200 Million410 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A6-9225 and Celeron Dual-Core T3100 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.

SocketBGABGA479, PGA478
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-9225 and Celeron Dual-Core T3100. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, TBM, FMA4, XOP, SMEP, CPB, AES-NI, RDRANDno data
AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-9225 and Celeron Dual-Core T3100. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) ( - 686 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.

A6-9225 0.84
+13.5%
Celeron Dual-Core T3100 0.74

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.

A6-9225 1335
+13.7%
Celeron Dual-Core T3100 1174

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.

A6-9225 2532
+33.3%
Celeron Dual-Core T3100 1900

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.

A6-9225 4193
+12.1%
Celeron Dual-Core T3100 3740

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.

A6-9225 2132
+26.4%
Celeron Dual-Core T3100 1687

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.84 0.74
Recency 1 June 2018 1 September 2009
Chip lithography 28 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 35 Watt

A6-9225 has a 13.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 60.7% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

The A6-9225 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron Dual-Core T3100 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A6-9225 and Celeron Dual-Core T3100, 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 A6-9225
A6-9225
Intel Celeron Dual-Core T3100
Celeron Dual-Core T3100

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 2301 vote

Rate A6-9225 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 35 votes

Rate Celeron Dual-Core T3100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A6-9225 or Celeron Dual-Core T3100, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.