CPU
GPU
A4-3330MX
Celeron N3060
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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 A4-3330MX is positioned at rank 851 and the Celeron N3060 is on rank 173, so the Celeron N3060 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar A4-3330MX
Performance Per Dollar Celeron N3060
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | A4-3330MX | Celeron N3060 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($107) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Llano (2011−2012) / 32 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Braswell (2015−2016) / 14 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | A4-3330MX | Celeron N3060 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($107) |
Performance Check
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.
Counter-Strike 2
Valorant
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of A4-3330MX and Celeron N3060
A4-3330MX
The A4-3330MX 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 2.2 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): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,264 points. Launch price was $50.
Celeron N3060
The Celeron N3060 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 15 January 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Braswell (2015−2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.48 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,267 points. Launch price was $107.
Processing Power
Both the A4-3330MX and Celeron N3060 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the A4-3330MX versus 2.48 GHz on the Celeron N3060 — a 4.7% clock advantage for the A4-3330MX (base: 2.2 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). The A4-3330MX uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron N3060 uses Braswell (2015−2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the A4-3330MX scores 1,264 against the Celeron N3060's 1,267 — a 0.2% lead for the Celeron N3060. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | A4-3330MX | Celeron N3060 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.6 GHz+5% | 2.48 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.2 GHz+38% | 1.6 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1 MB |
| Process | 32 nm | 14 nm-56% |
| Architecture | Llano (2011−2012) | Braswell (2015−2016) |
| PassMark | 1,264 | 1,267 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 263 | — |
Memory & Platform
The A4-3330MX uses the FS1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron N3060 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the A4-3330MX versus 1600 on the Celeron N3060 — the Celeron N3060 supports 199.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A4-3330MX supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (A4-3330MX) vs 4 (Celeron N3060) — the A4-3330MX offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.
| Feature | A4-3330MX | Celeron N3060 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FS1 | FCBGA1170 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 3.0+50% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1333 | 1600+53233% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB+209715100% | 8 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 16+300% | 4 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4-3330MX) vs true (Celeron N3060). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 6480G (A4-3330MX) and Intel HD Graphics 400 (Celeron N3060) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-3330MX targets Budget Laptop. Direct competitor: A4-3330MX rivals Pentium B980; Celeron N3060 rivals AMD E2-9010.
| Feature | A4-3330MX | Celeron N3060 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | Yes |
| IGPU Model | Radeon HD 6480G | Intel HD Graphics 400 |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | true |
| Target Use | Budget Laptop | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on A4-3330MX and Celeron N3060
