A6-9220e vs Celeron 847

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 847
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 17 Watt
0.30
A6-9220e
2017
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
0.61
+103%

A6-9220e outperforms Celeron 847 by a whopping 103% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 847 and A6-9220e processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31132799
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD Bristol Ridge
Power efficiency1.679.62
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date19 June 2011 (13 years ago)1 June 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$134no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 847 and A6-9220e 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speed1.1 GHz1.6 GHz
Boost clock speed1.1 GHz2.4 GHz
Bus typeDMI 2.0no data
Bus rate4 × 5 GT/sno data
Multiplier11no data
L1 cache64K (per core)160 KB
L2 cache256K (per core)1 MB
L3 cache2 MB (shared)no data
Chip lithography32 nm28 nm
Die size131 mm2124.5 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C90 °C
Number of transistors504 million1200 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 847 and A6-9220e 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)no data
SocketFCBGA1023BGA
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 847 and A6-9220e. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2Virtualization,
FMA+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data

Security technologies

Celeron 847 and A6-9220e technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 847 and A6-9220e 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 Celeron 847 and A6-9220e. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4
Maximum memory size16 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth21.335 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (350 - 800 MHz)AMD Radeon R4 (Stoney Ridge) ( - 600 MHz)
Graphics max frequency800 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 847 and A6-9220e integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 847 and A6-9220e.

PCIe version2.0no 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 847 0.30
A6-9220e 0.61
+103%

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 847 479
A6-9220e 970
+103%

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Celeron 847 1270
+20.2%
A6-9220e 1056

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Celeron 847 2408
+38.3%
A6-9220e 1741

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Celeron 847 80.4
A6-9220e 35.2
+128%

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Celeron 847 0.1
A6-9220e 0.3
+325%

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Celeron 847 824
+58.8%
A6-9220e 519

Geekbench 2

Celeron 847 2014
A6-9220e 3192
+58.5%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.30 0.61
Integrated graphics card 0.34 1.17
Recency 19 June 2011 1 June 2017
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 6 Watt

A6-9220e has a 103.3% higher aggregate performance score, 244.1% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 5 years, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 183.3% lower power consumption.

The A6-9220e is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 847 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 847 and A6-9220e, 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 847
Celeron 847
AMD A6-9220e
A6-9220e

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.


2.8 389 votes

Rate Celeron 847 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 316 votes

Rate A6-9220e on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 847 or A6-9220e, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.