A4-3300 vs Celeron N3150

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron N3150
2015
4 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
0.75
+27.1%
A4-3300
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.59

Celeron N3150 outperforms A4-3300 by a significant 27% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N3150 and A4-3300 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26512798
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Celeronno data
Power efficiency11.830.86
Architecture codenameBraswell (2015−2016)Llano (2011−2012)
Release date1 April 2015 (9 years ago)7 September 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron N3150 and A4-3300 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 speed1.6 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed2.08 GHz2.5 GHz
Bus typeIDIno data
L1 cacheno data128 KB (per core)
L2 cache2 MB512 KB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm32 nm
Die sizeno data228 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N3150 and A4-3300 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)1
SocketFCBGA1170FM1
Power consumption (TDP)6 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N3150 and A4-3300. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Smart Response-no data
GPIO+no data
Smart Connect-no data
HD Audio+no data
RST-no data

Security technologies

Celeron N3150 and A4-3300 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Secure Boot+no data
Secure Key+no data
Identity Protection+-
OS Guard-no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N3150 and A4-3300 are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N3150 and A4-3300. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size8 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for Intel® Celeron® Processor N3000 SeriesRadeon HD 6410D
Max video memory8 GBno data
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency640 MHzno data
Execution Units12no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N3150 and A4-3300 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron N3150 and A4-3300 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX+no data
OpenGL+no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N3150 and A4-3300.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes4no data
USB revision2.0/3.0no data
Total number of SATA ports2no data
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports2no data
Number of USB ports5no data
Integrated LAN-no data
UART+no 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 N3150 0.75
+27.1%
A4-3300 0.59

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 N3150 1192
+26.5%
A4-3300 942

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Celeron N3150 164
A4-3300 235
+43.3%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Celeron N3150 499
+18%
A4-3300 423

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.75 0.59
Recency 1 April 2015 7 September 2011
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 14 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 65 Watt

Celeron N3150 has a 27.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 983.3% lower power consumption.

The Celeron N3150 is our recommended choice as it beats the A4-3300 in performance tests.

Be aware that Celeron N3150 is a notebook processor while A4-3300 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N3150 and A4-3300, 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 N3150
Celeron N3150
AMD A4-3300
A4-3300

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 58 votes

Rate Celeron N3150 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 116 votes

Rate A4-3300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N3150 or A4-3300, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.