A10-7300 vs Celeron 3965U

A10-7300

4 Cores4 Thrd4 WWMax: 3.2 GHz2014

Celeron 3965U

2 Cores2 Thrd15 WWMax: 2.2 GHz2017

Performance Spectrum - CPU

A10-7300

4 / 4

1,736

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron 3965U

2 / 2

1,753

+1.0%

Celeron P4600

Celeron Dual-Core T3100

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The A10-7300 is positioned at rank 1042 and the Celeron 3965U is on rank 265, so the Celeron 3965U offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar A10-7300

#1030

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

2536%

#1031

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

2499%

#1032

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

2294%

#1033

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

2283%

#1034

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

2263%

#1036

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

2185%

#1037

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

2095%

#1038

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

2092%

#1039

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

2035%

#1042

A10-7300

MSRP: $150|Avg: $50

100%

#1043

Core i7-3612QE

MSRP: $426|Avg: $50

100%

#1044

Pentium Dual Core T4200

MSRP: $100|Avg: $10

99%

#1045

A6 Micro-6500T

MSRP: $100|Avg: $15

99%

#1046

Pentium N3520

MSRP: $100|Avg: $10

99%

#1047

E2-3800

MSRP: $100|Avg: $20

98%

#1048

Athlon X2 QL-66

MSRP: $150|Avg: $5

98%

#1049

Athlon II Neo K145

MSRP: $50|Avg: $10

98%

#1050

Celeron P4600

MSRP: $86|Avg: $15

97%

#1051

Core 2 Duo U7500

MSRP: $100|Avg: $10

96%

#1052

Pentium 987

MSRP: $134|Avg: $20

96%

#1053

Core i7-4910MQ

MSRP: $570|Avg: $570

96%

#1054

Pentium T4400

MSRP: $107|Avg: $5

95%

#1056

Athlon X2 QL-65

MSRP: $150|Avg: $22

94%

#1057

Pentium J2850

MSRP: $94|Avg: $94

93%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron 3965U

#73

Core i9-13950HX

MSRP: $590|Avg: $199

99%

#253

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

418%

#254

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

412%

#255

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

378%

#256

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

377%

#257

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

373%

#259

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

361%

#260

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

346%

#261

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

345%

#262

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

336%

#265

Celeron 3965U

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#277

Core 2 Extreme X9100

MSRP: $851|Avg: N/A

98%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Generational Difference: This comparison involves processors from different technological eras. The Celeron 3965U (2017) utilizes 14 nm technology and DDR3, DDR4, providing a fundamental performance advantage.

Insight	A10-7300	Celeron 3965U
Gaming	✅ Superior gaming performance	❌ Lower gaming performance
Workstation	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks	✅ Better multi-core power
Price	⚠️ Higher cost ($50)	✅ More affordable ($0)
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Kaveri (2014−2015) / 28 nm)	✨ Modern (Kaby Lake-U (2017) / 14 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

The A10-7300 (2014) relies on 28 nm technology and DDR3, placing it in a different performance category relative to modern standards.

Insight	A10-7300	Celeron 3965U
Cost Efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	⚠️ Higher cost ($50)	✅ More affordable ($0)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

A10-7300 Benchmark Check

Celeron 3965U Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of A10-7300 and Celeron 3965U

A10-7300

The A10-7300 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Kaveri (2014−2015) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.9 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 4 MB. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,736 points. Launch price was $130.

Celeron 3965U

The Celeron 3965U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 January 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Kaby Lake-U (2017) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1356. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,753 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

The A10-7300 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron 3965U offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the A10-7300 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.2 GHz on the A10-7300 versus 2.2 GHz on the Celeron 3965U — a 37% clock advantage for the A10-7300 (base: 1.9 GHz vs 2.2 GHz). The A10-7300 uses the Kaveri (2014−2015) architecture (28 nm), while the Celeron 3965U uses Kaby Lake-U (2017) (14 nm). In PassMark, the A10-7300 scores 1,736 against the Celeron 3965U's 1,753 — a 1% lead for the Celeron 3965U.

Feature	A10-7300	Celeron 3965U
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 2
Boost Clock	3.2 GHz+45%	2.2 GHz
Base Clock	1.9 GHz	2.2 GHz+16%
L3 Cache	—	2 MB (total)
L2 Cache	4096 kB+1500%	256K (per core)
Process	28 nm	14 nm-50%
Architecture	Kaveri (2014−2015)	Kaby Lake-U (2017)
PassMark	1,736	1,753
Geekbench 6 Single	—	600
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	1,200

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A10-7300 uses the FP3 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron 3965U uses BGA1356 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the A10-7300 versus DDR4-2133 on the Celeron 3965U — the Celeron 3965U supports 28.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 3965U supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (A10-7300) vs 10 (Celeron 3965U) — the A10-7300 offers 6 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: FP3 (A10-7300) and SoC (Celeron 3965U).

Feature	A10-7300	Celeron 3965U
Socket	FP3	BGA1356
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600	DDR4-2133+33%
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	32 GB+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	❌	❌
PCIe Lanes	16+60%	10

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A10-7300) vs VT-x (Celeron 3965U). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon R6 (A10-7300) and Intel HD Graphics 610 (Celeron 3965U) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A10-7300 targets Laptop, Celeron 3965U targets Budget Laptop. Direct competitor: A10-7300 rivals Core i3-4010U; Celeron 3965U rivals Pentium Gold 4415U.