Celeron N4000 vs A8-3530MX

VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-3530MX
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 45 Watt
1.01
+8.6%
Celeron N4000
2017
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
0.93

A8-3530MX outperforms Celeron N4000 by a small 9% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A8-3530MX and Celeron N4000 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking24642529
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-SeriesIntel Celeron
Power efficiency2.1214.67
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Goldmont Plus (2017)
Release date14 June 2011 (13 years ago)11 December 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$107

Detailed specifications

A8-3530MX and Celeron N4000 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 speed1.9 GHz1.1 GHz
Boost clock speed2.6 GHz2.6 GHz
Multiplierno data11
L1 cache128 KB (per core)112 KB
L2 cache1 MB (per core)4 MB
L3 cache0 KB4 MB
Chip lithography32 nm14 nm
Die size228 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data105 deg C
Number of transistors1,178 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on A8-3530MX and Celeron N4000 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFS1FCBGA1090
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-3530MX and Celeron N4000. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6620GIntel® SSE4.2
AES-NI-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Smart Responseno data-
GPIOno data+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data-

Security technologies

A8-3530MX and Celeron N4000 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
MPX-+
Identity Protection-+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® ME
OS Guardno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-3530MX and Celeron N4000 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-3530MX and Celeron N4000. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data38.397 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 6620G (444 MHz)Intel UHD Graphics 600
Max video memoryno data8 GB
Quick Sync Video-+
Graphics max frequencyno data650 MHz
Execution Unitsno data12

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A8-3530MX and Celeron N4000 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
MIPI-DSIno data+

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by A8-3530MX and Celeron N4000 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution supportno data+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A8-3530MX and Celeron N4000 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12
OpenGLno data4.4

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A8-3530MX and Celeron N4000.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data6
USB revisionno data2.0/3.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data8
Integrated LANno data-
UARTno 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.

A8-3530MX 1.01
+8.6%
Celeron N4000 0.93

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.

A8-3530MX 1608
+9.2%
Celeron N4000 1472

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.

A8-3530MX 299
Celeron N4000 324
+8.4%

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.

A8-3530MX 967
+82.8%
Celeron N4000 529

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.01 0.93
Integrated graphics card 0.89 0.87
Recency 14 June 2011 11 December 2017
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 6 Watt

A8-3530MX has a 8.6% higher aggregate performance score, 2.3% faster integrated GPU, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Celeron N4000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 6 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 650% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A8-3530MX and Celeron N4000.


Should you still have questions on choice between A8-3530MX and Celeron N4000, 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 A8-3530MX
A8-3530MX
Intel Celeron N4000
Celeron N4000

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.


2.8 66 votes

Rate A8-3530MX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 944 votes

Rate Celeron N4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A8-3530MX or Celeron N4000, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.