Celeron 2970M vs A8-3510MX
Aggregate performance score
A8-3510MX outperforms Celeron 2970M by a moderate 10% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A8-3510MX and Celeron 2970M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2456 | 2521 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD A-Series | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | 2.16 | 2.40 |
| Architecture codename | Llano (2011−2012) | Haswell (2013−2015) |
| Release date | 14 June 2011 (13 years ago) | 14 April 2014 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $75 |
Detailed specifications
A8-3510MX and Celeron 2970M 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 cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 1.8 GHz | 2.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 2.2 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 5 GT/s |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 2 MB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | 228 mm2 | 130 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 960 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on A8-3510MX and Celeron 2970M 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 configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | FS1 | FCPGA946 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 37 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-3510MX and Celeron 2970M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6620G | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2 |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
Security technologies
A8-3510MX and Celeron 2970M technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-3510MX and Celeron 2970M are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
| VT-d | no data | - |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-3510MX and Celeron 2970M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 32 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 25.6 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon HD 6620G (444 MHz) | Intel HD Graphics for 4th Generation Intel Processors |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 1.1 GHz |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of A8-3510MX and Celeron 2970M integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | - | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
| VGA | no data | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A8-3510MX and Celeron 2970M.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.03 | 0.94 |
| Integrated graphics card | 0.89 | 0.77 |
| Recency | 14 June 2011 | 14 April 2014 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 37 Watt |
A8-3510MX has a 9.6% higher aggregate performance score, 15.6% faster integrated GPU, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
Celeron 2970M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 45.5% more advanced lithography process, and 21.6% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A8-3510MX and Celeron 2970M.
Should you still have questions on choice between A8-3510MX and Celeron 2970M, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
