A4-3420 vs Celeron 1000M

CPU

GPU

A4-3420

2 Cores2 Thrd65 WWMax: 2.8 GHz2011

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Celeron 1000M

2 Cores2 Thrd512 WWMax: 1.8 GHz2013

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

A4-3420 vs Celeron 1000M Performance Spectrum

A4-3420

2 / 2

1,067

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron 1000M

2 / 2

1,070

+0.3%

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.

A4-3420 vs Celeron 1000M 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.

A4-3420 vs Celeron 1000M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A4-3420

2011

Why buy it

✅Costs $21 less on MSRP ($65 MSRP vs $86 MSRP).
✅Delivers 31.9% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 16.4 vs 12.4 PassMark/$ ($65 MSRP vs $86 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 512W, a 447W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Stock), unlike Celeron 1000M.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,067 vs 1,070).

Celeron 1000M

2013

Why buy it

✅+0.3% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.4 vs 16.4 PassMark/$ ($86 MSRP vs $65 MSRP).
❌687.7% higher power demand at 512W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A4-3420.

Quick Answers

So, is A4-3420 better than Celeron 1000M?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A4-3420 is ahead with a 1.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron 1000M pulls ahead with 0.3% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron 1000M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

A4-3420 is the better buy right now. A4-3420 comes in $21 cheaper on MSRP at $65 MSRP versus $86 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Celeron 1000M is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.3% better PassMark. It is also 31.9% better value on MSRP (16.4 vs 12.4 PassMark/$), 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 1000M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2011) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A4-3420 vs Celeron 1000M Technical Specifications

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

A4-3420

The A4-3420 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 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 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: 1,067 points. Launch price was $50.

Celeron 1000M

The Celeron 1000M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 January 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,070 points. Launch price was $86.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A4-3420 and Celeron 1000M share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the A4-3420 versus 1.8 GHz on the Celeron 1000M — a 43.5% clock advantage for the A4-3420 (base: 2.8 GHz vs 1.8 GHz). The A4-3420 uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron 1000M uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the A4-3420 scores 1,067 against the Celeron 1000M's 1,070 — a 0.3% lead for the Celeron 1000M. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A4-3420 vs 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 1000M.

Feature	A4-3420	Celeron 1000M
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.8 GHz+56%	1.8 GHz
Base Clock	2.8 GHz+56%	1.8 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	2 MB (total)
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)+100%	256K (per core)
Process	32 nm	22 nm-31%
Architecture	Llano (2011−2012)	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
PassMark	1,067	1,070
Geekbench 6 Single	300	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	500	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-3420 uses the FM1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron 1000M uses PGA988 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1600 memory speed. Both support up to 32 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: A55,A75,A85X (A4-3420) and Intel FCPGA988 (Celeron 1000M).

Feature	A4-3420	Celeron 1000M
Socket	FM1	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600	DDR3-1600
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	32 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (A4-3420) / not specified (Celeron 1000M). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 6410D (A4-3420) and Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) (Celeron 1000M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-3420 targets Entry Desktop. Direct competitor: A4-3420 rivals Pentium G630.

Feature	A4-3420	Celeron 1000M
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	Radeon HD 6410D	Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge)
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	AMD-V	—
Target Use	Entry Desktop	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the A4-3420 was priced at $65, while the Celeron 1000M came in at $86. On launch pricing ($65 vs $86), A4-3420 was $21 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the A4-3420 delivers 16.4 pts/$ vs 12.4 pts/$ for the Celeron 1000M — making the A4-3420 the 27.5% better value option.

Feature	A4-3420	Celeron 1000M
MSRP	$65-24%	$86
Performance per Dollar	16.4+32%	12.4
Release Date	2011	2013

Search A4-3420 on Amazon

Search Celeron 1000M on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.