Celeron U3400 vs Athlon II X4 620e

VS

Primary details

Comparing Athlon II X4 620e and Celeron U3400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1993not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataIntel Celeron
Power efficiency3.85no data
Architecture codenamePropus (2009−2011)Westmere (2010−2011)
Release date3 May 2011 (13 years ago)24 May 2010 (14 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Athlon II X4 620e and Celeron U3400 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 speed2.6 GHz1.06 GHz
Boost clock speed2.6 GHz0.07 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 1.0
Bus rateno data1 × 2.5 GT/s
Multiplierno data8
L1 cache128 KB (per core)128 KB
L2 cache512 KB (per core)512 KB
L3 cache0 KB2 MB
Chip lithography45 nm32 nm
Die size169 mm281 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Number of transistors300 million382 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Athlon II X4 620e and Celeron U3400 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)
SocketAM3BGA1288
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt18 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon II X4 620e and Celeron U3400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

FMA-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
PAEno data36 Bit
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+

Security technologies

Athlon II X4 620e and Celeron U3400 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon II X4 620e and Celeron U3400 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon II X4 620e and Celeron U3400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3-800
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data12.799 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel® HD Graphics for Previous Generation Intel® Processors
Clear Videono data+
Graphics max frequencyno data500 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Athlon II X4 620e and Celeron U3400 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon II X4 620e and Celeron U3400.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.



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.

Athlon II X4 620e 2906
+463%
Celeron U3400 516

Pros & cons summary


Recency 3 May 2011 24 May 2010
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 45 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 18 Watt

Athlon II X4 620e has an age advantage of 11 months, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Celeron U3400, on the other hand, has a 40.6% more advanced lithography process, and 150% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Athlon II X4 620e and Celeron U3400. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that Athlon II X4 620e is a desktop processor while Celeron U3400 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon II X4 620e and Celeron U3400, 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 Athlon II X4 620e
Athlon II X4 620e
Intel Celeron U3400
Celeron U3400

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.


3.3 3 votes

Rate Athlon II X4 620e on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.4 30 votes

Rate Celeron U3400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon II X4 620e or Celeron U3400, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.