Celeron 6305 vs Athlon 3000G
Aggregate performance score
Athlon 3000G outperforms Celeron 6305 by a whopping 115% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Athlon 3000G and Celeron 6305 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1672 | 2260 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 5.27 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Athlon | Intel Tiger Lake |
| Power efficiency | 7.63 | 8.26 |
| Architecture codename | Zen+ (2018−2019) | Tiger Lake-U (2020) |
| Release date | 21 November 2019 (5 years ago) | 1 September 2020 (4 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $49 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Athlon 3000G and Celeron 6305 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 3.5 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 1.8 GHz |
| Bus type | PCIe 3.0 | no data |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 GT/s |
| Multiplier | 35 | no data |
| L1 cache | 96K (per core) | 160 KB |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 2.5 MB |
| L3 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 4 MB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 10 nm SuperFin |
| Die size | 209.78 mm2? | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 4,800 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 3000G and Celeron 6305 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 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | AM4 | FCBGA1449 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 3000G and Celeron 6305. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
| Deep Learning Boost | - | + |
Security technologies
Athlon 3000G and Celeron 6305 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| SGX | no data | - |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 3000G and Celeron 6305 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 Athlon 3000G and Celeron 6305. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Dual-channel | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB? | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 42.671 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon Vega 3 | Intel UHD Graphics for 11th Gen Intel Processors |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Clear Video HD | no data | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 1.25 GHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 48 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Athlon 3000G and Celeron 6305 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 4 |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Athlon 3000G and Celeron 6305 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | 4096x2304@60Hz |
| Max resolution over eDP | no data | 4096x2304@60Hz |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | no data | 7680x4320@60Hz |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Athlon 3000G and Celeron 6305 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 12.1 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.6 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon 3000G and Celeron 6305.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 6 | no 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.
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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.82 | 1.31 |
| Integrated graphics card | 2.98 | 5.58 |
| Recency | 21 November 2019 | 1 September 2020 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 15 Watt |
Athlon 3000G has a 115.3% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more threads.
Celeron 6305, on the other hand, has 87.2% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 9 months, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.
The Athlon 3000G is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 6305 in performance tests.
Note that Athlon 3000G is a desktop processor while Celeron 6305 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 3000G and Celeron 6305, 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.
