A6-3400M vs Celeron 3855U

A6-3400M vs Celeron 3855U Performance Spectrum

A6-3400M

4 / 4

1,223

+0.7%

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.

A6-3400M 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.

A6-3400M 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.

A6-3400M

2011

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.3% higher average FPS across 48 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅60% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 10) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌133.3% higher power demand at 35W vs 15W.

Celeron 3855U

2015

Why buy it

✅Draws 15W instead of 35W, a 20W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than A6-3400M across 48 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (1,215 vs 1,223).

Quick Answers

So, is A6-3400M better than Celeron 3855U?

Yes. A6-3400M 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 and 0.7% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, A6-3400M 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, A6-3400M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

A6-3400M still makes the most sense overall. A6-3400M 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?

Celeron 3855U makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2015 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A6-3400M vs Celeron 3855U Technical Specifications

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

A6-3400M

The A6-3400M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Llano (2011−2012) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.3 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FS1. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,223 points. Launch price was $70.

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

The A6-3400M packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron 3855U offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the A6-3400M has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.3 GHz on the A6-3400M versus 1.6 GHz on the Celeron 3855U — a 35.9% clock advantage for the A6-3400M (base: 1.4 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). The A6-3400M uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron 3855U uses Skylake (2015−2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the A6-3400M scores 1,223 against the Celeron 3855U's 1,215 — a 0.7% lead for the A6-3400M. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 218 vs 361, a 49.4% lead for the Celeron 3855U that directly translates to higher frame rates. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A6-3400M vs 2 MB on the Celeron 3855U.

Feature	A6-3400M	Celeron 3855U
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.3 GHz+44%	1.6 GHz
Base Clock	1.4 GHz	1.6 GHz+14%
L3 Cache	0 kB	2 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)+100%	512 kB
Process	32 nm	14 nm-56%
Architecture	Llano (2011−2012)	Skylake (2015−2016)
PassMark	1,223	1,215
Geekbench 6 Single	218	361+66%
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	632

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A6-3400M uses the FS1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron 3855U uses BGA1356 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the A6-3400M versus DDR4 2133 MHz on the Celeron 3855U — the Celeron 3855U supports 60% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 3855U supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (A6-3400M) vs 10 (Celeron 3855U) — the A6-3400M offers 6 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A6-3400M	Celeron 3855U
Socket	FS1	BGA1356
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	DDR4 2133 MHz+60%
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	32 GB+300%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16+60%	10

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A6-3400M) vs true (Celeron 3855U). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 6520G (A6-3400M) and Intel HD Graphics 510 (Celeron 3855U) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A6-3400M targets Budget Laptop, Celeron 3855U targets Budget. Direct competitor: A6-3400M rivals Core i3-2310M; Celeron 3855U rivals Pentium 3825U.