A4-9120 vs Celeron E3400

A4-9120 vs Celeron E3400 Performance Spectrum

A4-9120

2 / 2

1,222

+0.2%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron E3400

2 / 2

1,220

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 E3400 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 E3400: 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

✅+0.9% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅Draws 1W instead of 65W, a 64W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R3, while Celeron E3400 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Celeron E3400.

Celeron E3400

2010

Why buy it

✅Includes a boxed cooler (true), unlike A4-9120.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (347 vs 350).
❌Lower PassMark (1,220 vs 1,222).
❌Launch MSRP is still $53 MSRP, while A4-9120 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌6400% higher power demand at 65W vs 1W.
❌No integrated graphics, while A4-9120 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is A4-9120 better than Celeron E3400?

Yes. A4-9120 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.2% 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 2.9% more average FPS across 50 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 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

A4-9120 is still the much better call for a fresh build. A4-9120 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $53 MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron E3400 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2010 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (23.0 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA775.

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 2010) 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 E3400 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 E3400

The Celeron E3400 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 17 January 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Wolfdale (2008−2010) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (total). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,220 points. Launch price was $76.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A4-9120 and Celeron E3400 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the A4-9120 versus 2.6 GHz on the Celeron E3400 — a 3.9% clock advantage for the Celeron E3400 (base: 2.2 GHz vs 2.6 GHz). The A4-9120 uses the Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Celeron E3400 uses Wolfdale (2008−2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A4-9120 scores 1,222 against the Celeron E3400's 1,220 — a 0.2% lead for the A4-9120. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 350 vs 347, a 0.9% lead for the A4-9120 that directly translates to higher frame rates.

Feature	A4-9120	Celeron E3400
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.5 GHz	2.6 GHz+4%
Base Clock	2.2 GHz	2.6 GHz+18%
L3 Cache	—	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB (total)
Process	28 nm-38%	45 nm
Architecture	Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)	Wolfdale (2008−2010)
PassMark	1,222	1,220
Geekbench 6 Single	350	347
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	624

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-9120 uses the BGA socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron E3400 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2133 on the A4-9120 versus 1066 on the Celeron E3400 — the A4-9120 supports 100.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 8 GB of RAM. Memory channels: 1 (A4-9120) vs 2 (Celeron E3400). PCIe lanes: 8 (A4-9120) vs 0 (Celeron E3400) — the A4-9120 offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A4-9120	Celeron E3400
Socket	BGA	LGA775
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+173%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2133+100%	1066
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	8 GB
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	8	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4-9120) vs true (Celeron E3400). The A4-9120 includes integrated graphics (Radeon R3), while the Celeron E3400 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-9120 targets Entry Laptop, Celeron E3400 targets Budget. Direct competitor: A4-9120 rivals Celeron N3350; Celeron E3400 rivals Pentium E5200.