A4-3320M vs Celeron Dual-Core SU2300

A4-3320M vs Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 Performance Spectrum

A4-3320M

2 / 2

1,241

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron Dual-Core SU2300

2 / 2

1,250

+0.7%

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.

A4-3320M vs Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 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.

A4-3320M vs Celeron Dual-Core SU2300: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A4-3320M

2011

Why buy it

✅+67.3% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅166.7% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 6) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 6480G, while Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,241 vs 1,250).
❌3400% higher power demand at 35W vs 1W.

Celeron Dual-Core SU2300

2009

Why buy it

✅+0.7% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 1W instead of 35W, a 34W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (150 vs 251).
❌Launch MSRP is still $134 MSRP, while A4-3320M mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while A4-3320M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 better than A4-3320M?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A4-3320M is ahead with a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 pulls ahead with 0.7% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 is the better buy right now. Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $134 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.7% better PassMark. The compromise is that A4-3320M is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (9.3 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

A4-3320M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2009). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A4-3320M vs Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 Technical Specifications

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

A4-3320M

The A4-3320M 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 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 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: 1,241 points. Launch price was $50.

Celeron Dual-Core SU2300

The Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 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: 1,250 points. Launch price was $134.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A4-3320M and Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the A4-3320M versus 1.2 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 — a 73.7% clock advantage for the A4-3320M. The A4-3320M uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 uses Penryn (2008−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A4-3320M scores 1,241 against the Celeron Dual-Core SU2300's 1,250 — a 0.7% lead for the Celeron Dual-Core SU2300. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 251 vs 150, a 50.4% lead for the A4-3320M that directly translates to higher frame rates.

Feature	A4-3320M	Celeron Dual-Core SU2300
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.6 GHz+117%	1.2 GHz
Base Clock	2 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	1,241	1,250
Geekbench 6 Single	251+67%	150
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	280

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-3320M uses the FS1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 uses BGA956 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the A4-3320M versus DDR3-800 on the Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 — the A4-3320M supports 66.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A4-3320M supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (A4-3320M) vs 6 (Celeron Dual-Core SU2300) — the A4-3320M offers 10 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A4-3320M	Celeron Dual-Core SU2300
Socket	FS1	BGA956
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0+82%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333+67%	DDR3-800
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+300%	4 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16+167%	6

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4-3320M) vs VT-x (Celeron Dual-Core SU2300). The A4-3320M includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 6480G), while the Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-3320M targets Budget Laptop, Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 targets Legacy Mobile. Direct competitor: A4-3320M rivals Pentium B970; Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 rivals Pentium SU4100.