A4-3310MX vs Celeron N2830

A4-3310MX vs Celeron N2830 Performance Spectrum

A4-3310MX

2 / 2

1,190

+0.4%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron N2830

2 / 2

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 N2830 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 N2830: 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

✅300% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 4) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌400% higher power demand at 35W vs 7W.

Celeron N2830

2014

Why buy it

✅Draws 7W instead of 35W, a 28W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,185 vs 1,190).

Quick Answers

So, is A4-3310MX better than Celeron N2830?

Yes. A4-3310MX is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you 0.4% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, A4-3310MX has the edge because it leads the single-thread side of this matchup with 3.7% higher max boost clock.

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?

A4-3310MX still makes the most sense overall. A4-3310MX comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.4% higher PassMark.

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

Celeron N2830 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A4-3310MX vs Celeron N2830 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 N2830

The Celeron N2830 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 23 February 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.16 GHz, with boost up to 2.41 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 7.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,185 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A4-3310MX and Celeron N2830 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the A4-3310MX versus 2.41 GHz on the Celeron N2830 — a 3.7% clock advantage for the A4-3310MX (base: 2.1 GHz vs 2.16 GHz). The A4-3310MX uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron N2830 uses Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the A4-3310MX scores 1,190 against the Celeron N2830's 1,185 — a 0.4% lead for the A4-3310MX. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	A4-3310MX	Celeron N2830
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.5 GHz+4%	2.41 GHz
Base Clock	2.1 GHz	2.16 GHz+3%
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	512K (per core)+51100%
Process	32 nm	22 nm-31%
Architecture	Llano (2011−2012)	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
PassMark	1,190	1,185
Geekbench 6 Single	273	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-3310MX uses the FS1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron N2830 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1333 memory speed. The A4-3310MX 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 (A4-3310MX) vs 4 (Celeron N2830) — the A4-3310MX offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A4-3310MX	Celeron N2830
Socket	FS1	FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	1333
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+100%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16+300%	4

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4-3310MX) vs true (Celeron N2830). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 6480G (A4-3310MX) and Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (Celeron N2830) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-3310MX targets Budget Laptop. Direct competitor: A4-3310MX rivals Pentium B960; Celeron N2830 rivals AMD A6-6310.