A4-9120C vs Celeron Dual-Core SU2300

A4-9120C vs Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 Performance Spectrum

A4-9120C

2 / 2

1,258

+0.6%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron Dual-Core SU2300

2 / 2

1,250

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.

A4-9120C vs Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 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.

A4-9120C vs Celeron Dual-Core SU2300: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A4-9120C

2019

Why buy it

✅+178.7% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R4, while Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌500% higher power demand at 6W vs 1W.

Celeron Dual-Core SU2300

2009

Why buy it

✅Draws 1W instead of 6W, a 5W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (150 vs 418).
❌Lower PassMark (1,250 vs 1,258).
❌Launch MSRP is still $134 MSRP, while A4-9120C mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while A4-9120C can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is A4-9120C better than Celeron Dual-Core SU2300?

Yes. A4-9120C is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 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, A4-9120C is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.1% 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, A4-9120C 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?

A4-9120C is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. A4-9120C comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $134 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 only looks good on raw value math because it is a cheap legacy laptop chip, not because it is a real desktop gaming recommendation. It simply does not keep up in modern games, especially when the gap is already 0.1% in the shared gaming data.

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

A4-9120C makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 vs 2009) 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.

A4-9120C vs Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 Technical Specifications

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

A4-9120C

The A4-9120C 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. Max frequency: 1.6 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: 1,258 points. Launch price was $50.

Celeron Dual-Core SU2300

The Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.2 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: BGA956. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,250 points. Launch price was $134.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A4-9120C and Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.6 GHz on the A4-9120C versus 1.2 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 — a 28.6% clock advantage for the A4-9120C. The A4-9120C uses the Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 uses Penryn (2008−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A4-9120C scores 1,258 against the Celeron Dual-Core SU2300's 1,250 — a 0.6% lead for the A4-9120C. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 418 vs 150, a 94.4% lead for the A4-9120C that directly translates to higher frame rates.

Feature	A4-9120C	Celeron Dual-Core SU2300
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.6 GHz+33%	1.2 GHz
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB
Process	28 nm-38%	45 nm
Architecture	Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)	Penryn (2008−2011)
PassMark	1,258	1,250
Geekbench 6 Single	418+179%	150
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	280

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-9120C uses the BGA socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 uses BGA956 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-1866 on the A4-9120C versus DDR3-800 on the Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 — the A4-9120C supports 133.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A4-9120C supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (A4-9120C) vs 2 (Celeron Dual-Core SU2300). PCIe lanes: 8 (A4-9120C) vs 6 (Celeron Dual-Core SU2300) — the A4-9120C offers 2 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A4-9120C	Celeron Dual-Core SU2300
Socket	BGA	BGA956
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+173%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-1866+133%	DDR3-800
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB+100%	4 GB
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	8+33%	6

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4-9120C) vs VT-x (Celeron Dual-Core SU2300). The A4-9120C includes integrated graphics (Radeon R4), while the Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-9120C targets Chromebook, Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 targets Legacy Mobile. Direct competitor: A4-9120C rivals Celeron N3350; Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 rivals Pentium SU4100.