A4-6320 vs Celeron N6211

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron N6211
2022
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
1.41
+46.9%
A4-6320
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.96

Celeron N6211 outperforms A4-6320 by a considerable 47% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N6211 and A4-6320 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking21972485
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.33no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesElkhart Lakeno data
Power efficiency20.531.40
Architecture codenameElkhart Lake (2022)Richland (2013−2014)
Release date17 July 2022 (2 years ago)December 2013 (10 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$54no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron N6211 and A4-6320 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 speed1.2 GHz3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed3 GHz4 GHz
L1 cacheno data96 KB
L2 cache1.5 MB1024 KB
Chip lithography10 nm32 nm
Die sizeno data246 mm2
Maximum core temperature70 °C70 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data70 °C
Number of transistorsno data1,303 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N6211 and A4-6320 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 configurationno data1
SocketBGA1493FM2
Power consumption (TDP)6.5 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N6211 and A4-6320. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX-+
PowerNow-+
PowerGating-+
VirusProtect-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N6211 and A4-6320 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
IOMMU 2.0-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N6211 and A4-6320. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3-1600
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU)AMD Radeon™ HD 8370D
Number of pipelinesno data128
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N6211 and A4-6320 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron N6211 and A4-6320 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 11

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N6211 and A4-6320.

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.


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 N6211 1.41
+46.9%
A4-6320 0.96

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 N6211 2245
+46.7%
A4-6320 1530

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.41 0.96
Chip lithography 10 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 65 Watt

Celeron N6211 has a 46.9% higher aggregate performance score, a 220% more advanced lithography process, and 983.3% lower power consumption.

The Celeron N6211 is our recommended choice as it beats the A4-6320 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N6211 and A4-6320, 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 N6211
Celeron N6211
AMD A4-6320
A4-6320

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.


2.3 4 votes

Rate Celeron N6211 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 4 votes

Rate A4-6320 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N6211 or A4-6320, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.