Celeron G6900TE vs A8-3800

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-3800
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
1.29
Celeron G6900TE
2022
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
1.49
+15.5%

Celeron G6900TE outperforms A8-3800 by a moderate 16% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A8-3800 and Celeron G6900TE processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22732146
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.884.03
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Alder Lake-S (2022)
Release date30 June 2011 (13 years ago)4 January 2022 (2 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A8-3800 and Celeron G6900TE 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 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed2.7 GHz2.4 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)80K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)1.25 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm10 nm
Die size228 mm2no data
Number of transistors1,178 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on A8-3800 and Celeron G6900TE 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
SocketFM11700
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-3800 and Celeron G6900TE. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
TSX-+

Security technologies

A8-3800 and Celeron G6900TE technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-3800 and Celeron G6900TE are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-3800 and Celeron G6900TE. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4, DDR5 Dual-channel

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 6550DIntel UHD Graphics 710

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A8-3800 and Celeron G6900TE.

PCIe versionno data5.0

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
Celeron G6900TE 1.49
+15.5%

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
Celeron G6900TE 2373
+15.8%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.29 1.49
Integrated graphics card 1.04 2.85
Recency 30 June 2011 4 January 2022
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 35 Watt

A8-3800 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Celeron G6900TE, on the other hand, has a 15.5% higher aggregate performance score, 174% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 10 years, a 220% more advanced lithography process, and 85.7% lower power consumption.

The Celeron G6900TE is our recommended choice as it beats the A8-3800 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A8-3800 and Celeron G6900TE, 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 G6900TE
Celeron G6900TE

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 70 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.1 9 votes

Rate Celeron G6900TE 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 G6900TE, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.