Celeron N2808 vs A6-9225

VS

Aggregate performance score

A6-9225
2018
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.84
+163%
Celeron N2808
2014
2 cores / 2 threads, 4 Watt
0.32

A6-9225 outperforms Celeron N2808 by a whopping 163% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A6-9225 and Celeron N2808 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25863098
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Bristol RidgeIntel Celeron
Power efficiency5.307.57
Architecture codenameStoney Ridge (2016−2019)Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
Release date1 June 2018 (6 years ago)22 May 2014 (10 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A6-9225 and Celeron N2808 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 GHz1.58 GHz
Boost clock speed3.1 GHz2.25 GHz
L1 cache160 KB56K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB512K (per core)
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography28 nm22 nm
Die size124.5 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature90 °C100 °C
Number of transistors1200 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A6-9225 and Celeron N2808 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
SocketBGAFCBGA1170
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt4.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-9225 and Celeron N2808. 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+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Smart Connectno data+

Security technologies

A6-9225 and Celeron N2808 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 A6-9225 and Celeron N2808 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-9225 and Celeron N2808. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data4 GB
Max memory channelsno data1
Maximum memory bandwidthno data10.66 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) ( - 686 MHz)Intel HD Graphics for Intel Atom Processor Z3700 Series
Quick Sync Video-+
Graphics max frequencyno data792 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A6-9225 and Celeron N2808 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A6-9225 and Celeron N2808.

PCIe versionno data2.0
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.

A6-9225 0.84
+163%
Celeron N2808 0.32

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
+162%
Celeron N2808 510

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.84 0.32
Integrated graphics card 1.17 0.77
Recency 1 June 2018 22 May 2014
Chip lithography 28 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 4 Watt

A6-9225 has a 162.5% higher aggregate performance score, 51.9% faster integrated GPU, and an age advantage of 4 years.

Celeron N2808, on the other hand, has a 27.3% more advanced lithography process, and 275% lower power consumption.

The A6-9225 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron N2808 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A6-9225 and Celeron N2808, 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 N2808
Celeron N2808

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
2.5 42 votes

Rate Celeron N2808 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 N2808, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.