A6-3400M vs Celeron G470

A6-3400M vs Celeron G470 Performance Spectrum

A6-3400M

4 / 4

1,223

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron G470

1 / 2

1,225

+0.2%

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 G470 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 G470: 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

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (218 vs 300).
❌Lower PassMark (1,223 vs 1,225).

Celeron G470

2013

Why buy it

✅+37.6% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $35 MSRP, while A6-3400M mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron G470 better than A6-3400M?

Yes. Celeron G470 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.0% 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, Celeron G470 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.0% 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, Celeron G470 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron G470 is the better buy right now. Celeron G470 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $35 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (35.0 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Celeron G470 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2011) and more multi-core headroom with 1 cores / 2 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A6-3400M vs Celeron G470 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 G470

The Celeron G470 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It features 1 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency: 2 GHz. L3 cache: 1.5 MB Intel® Smart Cache. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333. Passmark benchmark score: 1,225 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The A6-3400M packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron G470 offers 1 cores / 2 threads — the A6-3400M has 3 more cores. The A6-3400M is built on the Llano (2011−2012) architecture. In PassMark, the A6-3400M scores 1,223 against the Celeron G470's 1,225 — a 0.2% lead for the Celeron G470. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 218 vs 300, a 31.7% lead for the Celeron G470 that directly translates to higher frame rates. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A6-3400M vs 1.5 MB Intel® Smart Cache on the Celeron G470.

Feature	A6-3400M	Celeron G470
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+300%	1 / 2
Boost Clock	2.3 GHz	—
Base Clock	1.4 GHz	2 GHz+43%
L3 Cache	0 kB	1.5 MB Intel® Smart Cache
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	—
Process	32 nm	32 nm
Architecture	Llano (2011−2012)	—
PassMark	1,223	1,225
Geekbench 6 Single	218	300+38%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A6-3400M uses the FS1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron G470 uses LGA1155 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the A6-3400M versus DDR3-1066 on the Celeron G470 — the A6-3400M supports 25% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron G470 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. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes.

Feature	A6-3400M	Celeron G470
Socket	FS1	LGA1155
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333+25%	DDR3-1066
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	32 GB+300%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A6-3400M) vs VT-x (Celeron G470). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 6520G (A6-3400M) and HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (Celeron G470) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A6-3400M targets Budget Laptop, Celeron G470 targets Budget. Direct competitor: A6-3400M rivals Core i3-2310M; Celeron G470 rivals Pentium G630.