A4-3300M vs Celeron M 723

A4-3300M vs Celeron M 723 Performance Spectrum

A4-3300M

2 / 2

1,186

+0.5%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron M 723

1 / 1

1,180

0.0%

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.

A4-3300M vs Celeron M 723 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

A4-3300M vs Celeron M 723: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

A4-3300M

2011

Why buy it

✅+156% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 6480G, while Celeron M 723 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌3400% higher power demand at 35W vs 1W.

Celeron M 723

2008

Why buy it

✅Draws 1W instead of 35W, a 34W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (100 vs 256).
❌Lower PassMark (1,180 vs 1,186).
❌Launch MSRP is still $161 MSRP, while A4-3300M mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while A4-3300M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is A4-3300M better than Celeron M 723?

Yes. A4-3300M is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.5% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, A4-3300M is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.4% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A4-3300M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.5% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

A4-3300M is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. A4-3300M comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $161 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron M 723 only looks good on raw value math because it is a cheap legacy laptop chip, not because it is a real desktop gaming recommendation. It simply does not keep up in modern games, especially when the gap is already 0.4% in the shared gaming data.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

A4-3300M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2008) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 1/1. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A4-3300M vs Celeron M 723 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

A4-3300M

The A4-3300M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Llano (2011−2012) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.9 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FS1. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,186 points. Launch price was $50.

Celeron M 723

The Celeron M 723 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.2 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: BGA956. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,180 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The A4-3300M packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Celeron M 723 offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the A4-3300M has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the A4-3300M versus 1.2 GHz on the Celeron M 723 — a 70.3% clock advantage for the A4-3300M. The A4-3300M uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron M 723 uses Penryn (2008−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A4-3300M scores 1,186 against the Celeron M 723's 1,180 — a 0.5% lead for the A4-3300M. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 256 vs 100, a 87.6% lead for the A4-3300M that directly translates to higher frame rates.

Feature	A4-3300M	Celeron M 723
Cores / Threads	2 / 2+100%	1 / 1
Boost Clock	2.5 GHz+108%	1.2 GHz
Base Clock	1.9 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	—
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	1 MB
Process	32 nm-29%	45 nm
Architecture	Llano (2011−2012)	Penryn (2008−2011)
PassMark	1,186	1,180
Geekbench 6 Single	256+156%	100
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	100

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-3300M uses the FS1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron M 723 uses BGA956 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the A4-3300M versus DDR2-800 on the Celeron M 723 — the A4-3300M supports 66.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A4-3300M supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (A4-3300M) vs 0 (Celeron M 723) — the A4-3300M offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: A60M,A70M (A4-3300M) and GS45 (Celeron M 723).

Feature	A4-3300M	Celeron M 723
Socket	FS1	BGA956
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0+82%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333+67%	DDR2-800
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+100%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4-3300M) vs None (Celeron M 723). The A4-3300M includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 6480G), while the Celeron M 723 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-3300M targets Budget Laptop, Celeron M 723 targets Legacy Embedded. Direct competitor: A4-3300M rivals Pentium B940; Celeron M 723 rivals Core Solo U2100.