Celeron 3867U vs A8-3800

VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-3800
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
1.29
+38.7%
Celeron 3867U
2019
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.93

A8-3800 outperforms Celeron 3867U by a substantial 39% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A8-3800 and Celeron 3867U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22712513
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Celeron
Power efficiency1.875.84
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Kaby Lake (2016−2019)
Release date30 June 2011 (13 years ago)1 March 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$107

Detailed specifications

A8-3800 and Celeron 3867U 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 speed2.4 GHz1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.7 GHz1.8 GHz
Bus rateno data4 GT/s
L1 cache128 KB (per core)128 KB
L2 cache1 MB (per core)512 KB
L3 cache0 KB2 MB
Chip lithography32 nm14 nm
Die size228 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistors1,178 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on A8-3800 and Celeron 3867U 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
SocketFM1FCBGA1356,FC-BGA1356
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-3800 and Celeron 3867U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data+
My WiFino data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
Smart Responseno data+

Security technologies

A8-3800 and Celeron 3867U technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
MPX-+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® ME
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-3800 and Celeron 3867U 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 A8-3800 and Celeron 3867U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3, DDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data34.1 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 6550DIntel HD Graphics 610
Max video memoryno data32 GB
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data900 MHz
Execution Unitsno data12

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A8-3800 and Celeron 3867U integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
DVIno data+

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by A8-3800 and Celeron 3867U integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution supportno data+
Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096x2304@24Hz
Max resolution over eDPno data4096x2304@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data4096x2304@60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A8-3800 and Celeron 3867U integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12
OpenGLno data4.4

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A8-3800 and Celeron 3867U.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data12

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.

A8-3800 1.29
+38.7%
Celeron 3867U 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.

A8-3800 2049
+39.7%
Celeron 3867U 1467

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.

A8-3800 291
Celeron 3867U 351
+20.6%

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.

A8-3800 889
+40.9%
Celeron 3867U 631

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.29 0.93
Integrated graphics card 1.04 1.85
Recency 30 June 2011 1 March 2019
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 15 Watt

A8-3800 has a 38.7% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Celeron 3867U, on the other hand, has 77.9% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 7 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 333.3% lower power consumption.

The A8-3800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 3867U in performance tests.

Note that A8-3800 is a desktop processor while Celeron 3867U is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A8-3800 and Celeron 3867U, 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 A8-3800
A8-3800
Intel Celeron 3867U
Celeron 3867U

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.


3.4 69 votes

Rate A8-3800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 20 votes

Rate Celeron 3867U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A8-3800 or Celeron 3867U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.