A4-9120 vs Celeron 3855U

A4-9120 vs Celeron 3855U Performance Spectrum

A4-9120

2 / 2

1,222

+0.6%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron 3855U

2 / 2

1,215

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.

A4-9120 vs Celeron 3855U 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.

A4-9120 vs Celeron 3855U: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A4-9120

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.3% higher average FPS across 48 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 1W instead of 15W, a 14W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Celeron 3855U

2015

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than A4-9120 across 48 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (1,215 vs 1,222).
❌1400% higher power demand at 15W vs 1W.

Quick Answers

So, is A4-9120 better than Celeron 3855U?

Yes. A4-9120 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 3.3% average FPS lead across 48 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.6% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, A4-9120 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.3% more average FPS across 48 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A4-9120 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

A4-9120 still makes the most sense overall. A4-9120 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.3% average FPS lead across 48 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

A4-9120 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2015) 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.

A4-9120 vs Celeron 3855U Technical Specifications

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

A4-9120

The A4-9120 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: BGA. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,222 points. Launch price was $50.

Celeron 3855U

The Celeron 3855U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 15 August 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Skylake (2015−2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 1.6 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1356. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-1866/2133, LPDDR3-1600/1866, DDR3L-1333/1600. Passmark benchmark score: 1,215 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A4-9120 and Celeron 3855U share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the A4-9120 versus 1.6 GHz on the Celeron 3855U — a 43.9% clock advantage for the A4-9120 (base: 2.2 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). The A4-9120 uses the Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Celeron 3855U uses Skylake (2015−2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the A4-9120 scores 1,222 against the Celeron 3855U's 1,215 — a 0.6% lead for the A4-9120. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 350 vs 361, a 3.1% lead for the Celeron 3855U that directly translates to higher frame rates.

Feature	A4-9120	Celeron 3855U
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.5 GHz+56%	1.6 GHz
Base Clock	2.2 GHz+38%	1.6 GHz
L3 Cache	—	2 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	512 kB
Process	28 nm	14 nm-50%
Architecture	Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)	Skylake (2015−2016)
PassMark	1,222	1,215
Geekbench 6 Single	350	361+3%
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	632

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-9120 uses the BGA socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron 3855U uses BGA1356 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR4-2133 memory speed. The Celeron 3855U supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (A4-9120) vs 2 (Celeron 3855U). PCIe lanes: 8 (A4-9120) vs 10 (Celeron 3855U) — the Celeron 3855U offers 2 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A4-9120	Celeron 3855U
Socket	BGA	BGA1356
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2133	DDR4 2133 MHz
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	32 GB+300%
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	8	10+25%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4-9120) vs true (Celeron 3855U). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon R3 (A4-9120) and Intel HD Graphics 510 (Celeron 3855U) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-9120 targets Entry Laptop, Celeron 3855U targets Budget. Direct competitor: A4-9120 rivals Celeron N3350; Celeron 3855U rivals Pentium 3825U.