A8-3550MX vs Celeron 4305UE

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 4305UE
2018
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
1.07
+0.9%
A8-3550MX
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 45 Watt
1.06

Celeron 4305UE outperforms A8-3550MX by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 4305UE and A8-3550MX processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking24112419
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD A-Series
Power efficiency6.752.23
Architecture codenameWhiskey Lake-U (2018−2019)Llano (2011−2012)
Release date1 October 2018 (6 years ago)20 December 2011 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 4305UE and A8-3550MX 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 cores2 (Dual-core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speedno data2 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz2.7 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)128K (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache2 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography10 nm32 nm
Die sizeno data228 mm2
Number of transistorsno data1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 4305UE and A8-3550MX 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
SocketIntel BGA 1528FS1
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt45 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 4305UE and A8-3550MX. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno data3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6620G
AES-NI+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 4305UE and A8-3550MX are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 4305UE and A8-3550MX. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel UHD Graphics 610AMD Radeon HD 6620G

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 4305UE and A8-3550MX.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes16no 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.

Celeron 4305UE 1.07
+0.9%
A8-3550MX 1.06

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.

Celeron 4305UE 1699
+0.7%
A8-3550MX 1687

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.07 1.06
Integrated graphics card 1.89 0.88
Recency 1 October 2018 20 December 2011
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 10 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 45 Watt

Celeron 4305UE has a 0.9% higher aggregate performance score, 114.8% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 6 years, a 220% more advanced lithography process, and 200% lower power consumption.

A8-3550MX, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Celeron 4305UE and A8-3550MX.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 4305UE and A8-3550MX, 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.


Intel Celeron 4305UE
Celeron 4305UE
AMD A8-3550MX
A8-3550MX

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Celeron 4305UE on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4 24 votes

Rate A8-3550MX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 4305UE or A8-3550MX, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.