A4-3310MX vs Celeron G465

A4-3310MX vs Celeron G465 Performance Spectrum

A4-3310MX

2 / 2

1,190

+0.4%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron G465

1 / 1

1,185

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.

A4-3310MX vs Celeron G465 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.

A4-3310MX vs Celeron G465: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A4-3310MX

2011

Why buy it

✅+0.4% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (273 vs 300).

Celeron G465

2012

Why buy it

✅+9.9% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,185 vs 1,190).
❌Launch MSRP is still $70 MSRP, while A4-3310MX mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron G465 better than A4-3310MX?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron G465 is ahead with a 2.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, A4-3310MX pulls ahead with 0.4% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A4-3310MX is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron G465 is the better buy right now. Celeron G465 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $70 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that A4-3310MX is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.4% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (16.9 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Celeron G465 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A4-3310MX vs Celeron G465 Technical Specifications

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

A4-3310MX

The A4-3310MX 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 2.1 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: 1,190 points. Launch price was $50.

Celeron G465

The Celeron G465 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 1 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.9 GHz, with boost up to 1.9 GHz. L3 cache: 1.5 MB. L2 cache: 256 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,185 points. Launch price was $80.

⚡

Processing Power

The A4-3310MX packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Celeron G465 offers 1 cores / 2 threads — the A4-3310MX has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the A4-3310MX versus 1.9 GHz on the Celeron G465 — a 27.3% clock advantage for the A4-3310MX (base: 2.1 GHz vs 1.9 GHz). The A4-3310MX uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron G465 uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the A4-3310MX scores 1,190 against the Celeron G465's 1,185 — a 0.4% lead for the A4-3310MX. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 273 vs 300, a 9.4% lead for the Celeron G465 that directly translates to higher frame rates. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A4-3310MX vs 1.5 MB on the Celeron G465.

Feature	A4-3310MX	Celeron G465
Cores / Threads	2 / 2+100%	1 / 2
Boost Clock	2.5 GHz+32%	1.9 GHz
Base Clock	2.1 GHz+11%	1.9 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	1.5 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)+300%	256 kB
Process	32 nm	32 nm
Architecture	Llano (2011−2012)	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark	1,190	1,185
Geekbench 6 Single	273	300+10%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-3310MX uses the FS1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron G465 uses LGA1155 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the A4-3310MX versus DDR3-1066 on the Celeron G465 — the A4-3310MX supports 25% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron G465 supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes.

Feature	A4-3310MX	Celeron G465
Socket	FS1	LGA1155
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333+25%	DDR3-1066
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	32 GB+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4-3310MX) vs VT-x (Celeron G465). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 6480G (A4-3310MX) and HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (Celeron G465) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-3310MX targets Budget Laptop, Celeron G465 targets Budget. Direct competitor: A4-3310MX rivals Pentium B960; Celeron G465 rivals Pentium G630.