A4 Micro-6400T vs Celeron M 900

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M 900 and A4 Micro-6400T processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated2721
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron MAMD A-Series
Power efficiencyno data14.30
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Mullins (2014)
Release date1 April 2009 (15 years ago)29 April 2014 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$70no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron M 900 and A4 Micro-6400T 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 cores1 (Single-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads14
Base clock speedno data1 GHz
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz1.6 GHz
Bus rate800 MHzno data
L2 cache1 MB2048 KB
Chip lithography45 nm28 nm
Die size107 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Number of transistors410 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M 900 and A4 Micro-6400T 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.

SocketPGA478FT3b
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt4.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M 900 and A4 Micro-6400T. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno data86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX
AES-NI-+
FMA-FMA4
AVX-+
PowerNow-+
PowerGating-+
VirusProtect-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M 900 and A4 Micro-6400T are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
IOMMU 2.0-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M 900 and A4 Micro-6400T. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3-1333
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon R3 Graphics
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron M 900 and A4 Micro-6400T integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron M 900 and A4 Micro-6400T integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M 900 and A4 Micro-6400T.

PCIe versionno data2.0

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.

Celeron M 900 123
A4 Micro-6400T 1082
+780%

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 M 900 2101
+67.9%
A4 Micro-6400T 1251

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Celeron M 900 1000
A4 Micro-6400T 1664
+66.4%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 1 April 2009 29 April 2014
Physical cores 1 4
Threads 1 4
Chip lithography 45 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 4 Watt

A4 Micro-6400T has an age advantage of 5 years, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 60.7% more advanced lithography process, and 775% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron M 900 and A4 Micro-6400T. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M 900 and A4 Micro-6400T, 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 M 900
Celeron M 900
AMD A4 Micro-6400T
A4 Micro-6400T

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 21 vote

Rate Celeron M 900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate A4 Micro-6400T on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M 900 or A4 Micro-6400T, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.