A6-3410MX vs Celeron N3060

A6-3410MX vs Celeron N3060 Performance Spectrum

A6-3410MX

4 / 4

1,274

+0.6%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron N3060

2 / 2

1,267

0.0%

Celeron N3000

Pentium T3400

Pentium Dual-Core E2200

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.

A6-3410MX vs Celeron N3060 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.

A6-3410MX vs Celeron N3060: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A6-3410MX

2011

Why buy it

✅+0.6% higher PassMark.
✅300% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 4) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌650% higher power demand at 45W vs 6W.

Celeron N3060

2016

Why buy it

✅Draws 6W instead of 45W, a 39W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,267 vs 1,274).
❌Launch MSRP is still $107 MSRP, while A6-3410MX mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron N3060 better than A6-3410MX?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Celeron N3060 is ahead with 7.8% higher max boost clock. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, A6-3410MX pulls ahead with 0.6% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A6-3410MX is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Celeron N3060 is the better buy right now. Celeron N3060 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $107 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 7.8% higher max boost clock. The compromise is that A6-3410MX is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.6% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (11.8 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 N3060 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A6-3410MX vs Celeron N3060 Technical Specifications

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

A6-3410MX

The A6-3410MX 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 1.6 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): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,274 points. Launch price was $70.

Celeron N3060

The Celeron N3060 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 15 January 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Braswell (2015−2016) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.48 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,267 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

The A6-3410MX packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron N3060 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the A6-3410MX has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.3 GHz on the A6-3410MX versus 2.48 GHz on the Celeron N3060 — a 7.5% clock advantage for the Celeron N3060 (base: 1.6 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). The A6-3410MX uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron N3060 uses Braswell (2015−2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the A6-3410MX scores 1,274 against the Celeron N3060's 1,267 — a 0.6% lead for the A6-3410MX. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	A6-3410MX	Celeron N3060
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.3 GHz	2.48 GHz+8%
Base Clock	1.6 GHz	1.6 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	1 MB
Process	32 nm	14 nm-56%
Architecture	Llano (2011−2012)	Braswell (2015−2016)
PassMark	1,274	1,267
Geekbench 6 Single	271	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A6-3410MX uses the FS1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron N3060 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1600 memory speed. Both support up to 8 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (A6-3410MX) vs 4 (Celeron N3060) — the A6-3410MX offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A6-3410MX	Celeron N3060
Socket	FS1	FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600	1600
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16+300%	4

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A6-3410MX) vs true (Celeron N3060). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 6520G (A6-3410MX) and Intel HD Graphics 400 (Celeron N3060) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A6-3410MX targets Mainstream Laptop. Direct competitor: A6-3410MX rivals Core i3-2330M; Celeron N3060 rivals AMD E2-9010.