Athlon 300U vs Celeron M 420
Aggregate performance score
Athlon 300U outperforms Celeron M 420 by a whopping 2578% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron M 420 and Athlon 300U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3395 | 1776 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Celeron M | AMD Athlon |
| Power efficiency | 0.32 | 15.29 |
| Architecture codename | Yonah (2005−2006) | Raven Ridge 2 (2019) |
| Release date | no data | 6 January 2019 (6 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron M 420 and Athlon 300U 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 1 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | PCIe 3.0 |
| Bus rate | 533 MHz | no data |
| Multiplier | no data | 24 |
| L1 cache | no data | 128K (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 1 MB L2 KB | 4 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | no data | 209.78 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 4940 Million |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| VID voltage range | 1.0V-1.3V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron M 420 and Athlon 300U 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 | no data | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | PPGA478 | FP5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 27 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 420 and Athlon 300U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | XFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMT |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | - | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Idle States | - | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron M 420 and Athlon 300U 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 M 420 and Athlon 300U are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-x | - | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 420 and Athlon 300U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4 Dual-channel |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 38.397 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon RX Vega 3 ( - 1000 MHz) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 420 and Athlon 300U.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 12 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.09 | 2.41 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 2 |
| Threads | 1 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 27 Watt | 15 Watt |
Athlon 300U has a 2577.8% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 80% lower power consumption.
The Athlon 300U is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron M 420 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 420 and Athlon 300U, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
