A6-5357M vs Celeron E3400

A6-5357M vs Celeron E3400 Performance Spectrum

A6-5357M

2 / 2

1,219

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron E3400

2 / 2

1,220

+0.1%

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.

A6-5357M vs Celeron E3400 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.

A6-5357M vs Celeron E3400: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A6-5357M

2013

Why buy it

✅+9.5% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 8450G, while Celeron E3400 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,219 vs 1,220).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Celeron E3400.

Celeron E3400

2010

Why buy it

✅+0.1% higher PassMark.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (true), unlike A6-5357M.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (347 vs 380).
❌Launch MSRP is still $53 MSRP, while A6-5357M mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while A6-5357M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is A6-5357M better than Celeron E3400?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A6-5357M is ahead with a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron E3400 pulls ahead with 0.1% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron E3400 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

A6-5357M is still the much better call for a fresh build. A6-5357M comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $53 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Celeron E3400 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2010 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (23.0 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA775.

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

A6-5357M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2010). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A6-5357M vs Celeron E3400 Technical Specifications

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

A6-5357M

The A6-5357M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Richland (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.9 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FP2. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,219 points. Launch price was $70.

Celeron E3400

The Celeron E3400 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 17 January 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Wolfdale (2008−2010) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (total). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,220 points. Launch price was $76.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A6-5357M and Celeron E3400 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.5 GHz on the A6-5357M versus 2.6 GHz on the Celeron E3400 — a 29.5% clock advantage for the A6-5357M (base: 2.9 GHz vs 2.6 GHz). The A6-5357M uses the Richland (2013−2014) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron E3400 uses Wolfdale (2008−2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A6-5357M scores 1,219 against the Celeron E3400's 1,220 — a 0.1% lead for the Celeron E3400. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 380 vs 347, a 9.1% lead for the A6-5357M that directly translates to higher frame rates. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	A6-5357M	Celeron E3400
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	3.5 GHz+35%	2.6 GHz
Base Clock	2.9 GHz+12%	2.6 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+51100%	1 MB (total)
Process	32 nm-29%	45 nm
Architecture	Richland (2013−2014)	Wolfdale (2008−2010)
PassMark	1,219	1,220
Geekbench 6 Single	380+10%	347
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	624

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A6-5357M uses the FP2 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron E3400 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the A6-5357M versus 1066 on the Celeron E3400 — the A6-5357M supports 50.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A6-5357M supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (A6-5357M) vs 0 (Celeron E3400) — the A6-5357M offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A6-5357M	Celeron E3400
Socket	FP2	LGA775
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+173%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600+50%	1066
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+100%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A6-5357M) vs true (Celeron E3400). The A6-5357M includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 8450G), while the Celeron E3400 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A6-5357M targets Budget Laptop, Celeron E3400 targets Budget. Direct competitor: A6-5357M rivals Core i3-3120M; Celeron E3400 rivals Pentium E5200.