A4 Micro-6400T vs Celeron 2961Y

A4 Micro-6400T vs Celeron 2961Y Performance Spectrum

A4 Micro-6400T

4 / 4

1,082

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron 2961Y

2 / 2

1,085

+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 Micro-6400T vs Celeron 2961Y 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 Micro-6400T vs Celeron 2961Y: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A4 Micro-6400T

2014

Why buy it

✅Draws 5W instead of 512W, a 507W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,082 vs 1,085).

Celeron 2961Y

2013

Why buy it

✅+0.3% higher PassMark.
✅50% more PCIe lanes (12 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌10140% higher power demand at 512W vs 5W.

Quick Answers

So, is A4 Micro-6400T better than Celeron 2961Y?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A4 Micro-6400T is ahead with a 1.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron 2961Y 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 2961Y 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 Micro-6400T still makes the most sense overall. A4 Micro-6400T comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

A4 Micro-6400T makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2013). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A4 Micro-6400T vs Celeron 2961Y Technical Specifications

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

A4 Micro-6400T

The A4 Micro-6400T is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 29 April 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Mullins (2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1 GHz, with boost up to 1.6 GHz. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1333. Passmark benchmark score: 1,082 points. Launch price was $69.

Celeron 2961Y

The Celeron 2961Y is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 December 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.1 GHz, with boost up to 1.1 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1168. Thermal design power (TDP): 11.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,085 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

The A4 Micro-6400T packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron 2961Y offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the A4 Micro-6400T has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.6 GHz on the A4 Micro-6400T versus 1.1 GHz on the Celeron 2961Y — a 37% clock advantage for the A4 Micro-6400T (base: 1 GHz vs 1.1 GHz). The A4 Micro-6400T uses the Mullins (2014) architecture (28 nm), while the Celeron 2961Y uses Haswell (2013−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the A4 Micro-6400T scores 1,082 against the Celeron 2961Y's 1,085 — a 0.3% lead for the Celeron 2961Y.

Feature	A4 Micro-6400T	Celeron 2961Y
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.6 GHz+45%	1.1 GHz
Base Clock	1 GHz	1.1 GHz+10%
L3 Cache	—	2 MB (total)
L2 Cache	2048 kB+700%	256K (per core)
Process	28 nm	22 nm-21%
Architecture	Mullins (2014)	Haswell (2013−2015)
PassMark	1,082	1,085
Geekbench 6 Single	180	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4 Micro-6400T uses the FT3 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron 2961Y uses FCBGA1168 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-1333 on the A4 Micro-6400T versus DDR3L-1600 on the Celeron 2961Y — the Celeron 2961Y supports 20% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 2961Y supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (A4 Micro-6400T) vs 2 (Celeron 2961Y). PCIe lanes: 8 (A4 Micro-6400T) vs 12 (Celeron 2961Y) — the Celeron 2961Y offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A4 Micro-6400T	Celeron 2961Y
Socket	FT3	FCBGA1168
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1333	DDR3L-1600+20%
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	16 GB+100%
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	8	12+50%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4 Micro-6400T) vs VT-x (Celeron 2961Y). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon R3 (A4 Micro-6400T) and HD Graphics (Haswell) (Celeron 2961Y) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4 Micro-6400T targets Tablet, Celeron 2961Y targets Budget. Direct competitor: A4 Micro-6400T rivals Atom Z3770; Celeron 2961Y rivals Pentium 2117U.