Celeron N3050 vs PRO A10-9700
Primary details
Comparing PRO A10-9700 and Celeron N3050 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1801 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | 3.34 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) | Braswell (2015−2016) |
| Release date | 27 July 2017 (7 years ago) | 1 April 2015 (9 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $107 |
Detailed specifications
PRO A10-9700 and Celeron N3050 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 2.16 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | IDI |
| L2 cache | 2048 KB | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 250 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | 90 °C |
| Number of transistors | 3,100 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on PRO A10-9700 and Celeron N3050 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 | 1 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | AM4 | FCBGA1170 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 6 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by PRO A10-9700 and Celeron N3050. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| FRTC | + | - |
| FreeSync | + | - |
| PowerTune | + | - |
| TrueAudio | + | - |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| PowerGating | + | - |
| Out-of-band client management | + | - |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
| 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
PRO A10-9700 and Celeron N3050 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 PRO A10-9700 and Celeron N3050 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | - |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| VT-i | no data | - |
| EPT | no data | + |
| IOMMU 2.0 | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by PRO A10-9700 and Celeron N3050. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-2400 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 2 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon R7 Graphics | Intel® HD Graphics for Intel® Celeron® Processor N3000 Series |
| iGPU core count | 6 | no data |
| Max video memory | no data | 8 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Clear Video | no data | + |
| Clear Video HD | no data | + |
| Enduro | + | - |
| UVD | + | - |
| VCE | + | - |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 600 MHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 12 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of PRO A10-9700 and Celeron N3050 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | + | + |
| HDMI | + | + |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by PRO A10-9700 and Celeron N3050 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | + |
| OpenGL | no data | + |
| Vulkan | + | - |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by PRO A10-9700 and Celeron N3050.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 8 | 4 |
| USB revision | no data | 2.0/3.0 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 2 |
| Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports | no data | 2 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 5 |
| 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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 27 July 2017 | 1 April 2015 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 6 Watt |
PRO A10-9700 has an age advantage of 2 years, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
Celeron N3050, on the other hand, has a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 983.3% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between PRO A10-9700 and Celeron N3050. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that PRO A10-9700 is a desktop processor while Celeron N3050 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between PRO A10-9700 and Celeron N3050, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
