A4-3400 vs Celeron B840
A4-3400
Celeron B840
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 A4-3400 is positioned at rank 850 and the Celeron B840 is on rank 1028, so the A4-3400 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar A4-3400
Performance Per Dollar Celeron B840
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | A4-3400 | Celeron B840 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Llano (2011−2012) / 32 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) / 32 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | A4-3400 | Celeron B840 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) |
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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of A4-3400 and Celeron B840
A4-3400
The A4-3400 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 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 2.7 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM1. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,066 points. Launch price was $50.
Celeron B840
The Celeron B840 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 July 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.9 GHz, with boost up to 1.9 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,065 points. Launch price was $86.
Processing Power
Both the A4-3400 and Celeron B840 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.7 GHz on the A4-3400 versus 1.9 GHz on the Celeron B840 — a 34.8% clock advantage for the A4-3400 (base: 2.7 GHz vs 1.9 GHz). The A4-3400 uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron B840 uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the A4-3400 scores 1,066 against the Celeron B840's 1,065 — a 0.1% lead for the A4-3400. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 349 vs 450, a 25.3% lead for the Celeron B840 that directly translates to higher frame rates. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A4-3400 vs 2 MB (total) on the Celeron B840.
| Feature | A4-3400 | Celeron B840 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.7 GHz+42% | 1.9 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.7 GHz+42% | 1.9 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 2 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB (per core)+100% | 256K (per core) |
| Process | 32 nm | 32 nm |
| Architecture | Llano (2011−2012) | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) |
| PassMark | 1,066 | 1,065 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 349 | 450+29% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 790 |
Memory & Platform
The A4-3400 uses the FM1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron B840 uses PGA988 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the A4-3400 versus 1333 on the Celeron B840 — the Celeron B840 supports 199.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 16 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: A55,A75 (A4-3400) and HM65,HM67,QM67 (Celeron B840).
| Feature | A4-3400 | Celeron B840 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FM1 | PGA988 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1600 | 1333+44333% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB+104857500% | 16 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4-3400) vs true (Celeron B840). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 6410D (A4-3400) and Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (Celeron B840) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-3400 targets Budget Desktop, Celeron B840 targets Budget. Direct competitor: A4-3400 rivals Pentium G620; Celeron B840 rivals Pentium B940.
| Feature | A4-3400 | Celeron B840 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | Yes |
| IGPU Model | Radeon HD 6410D | Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | true |
| Target Use | Budget Desktop | Budget |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on A4-3400 and Celeron B840
