A6-7000 vs Celeron T3300

A6-7000 vs Celeron T3300 Performance Spectrum

A6-7000

2 / 2

1,002

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron T3300

1,005

+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.

A6-7000 vs Celeron T3300 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.

A6-7000 vs Celeron T3300: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A6-7000

2014

Why buy it

✅Draws 1W instead of 35W, a 34W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R4 Graphics, while Celeron T3300 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,002 vs 1,005).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.0 vs 11.7 PassMark/$ ($100 MSRP vs $86 MSRP).

Celeron T3300

2010

Why buy it

✅Costs $14 less on MSRP ($86 MSRP vs $100 MSRP).
✅Delivers 16.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 11.7 vs 10.0 PassMark/$ ($86 MSRP vs $100 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌3400% higher power demand at 35W vs 1W.
❌No integrated graphics, while A6-7000 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron T3300 better than A6-7000?

Yes. Celeron T3300 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.3% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron T3300 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.3% 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 T3300 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark.

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

Celeron T3300 is the better buy right now. Celeron T3300 comes in $14 cheaper on MSRP at $86 MSRP versus $100 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 16.6% better value on MSRP (11.7 vs 10.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

A6-7000 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2010). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A6-7000 vs Celeron T3300 Technical Specifications

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

A6-7000

The A6-7000 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Kaveri (2014−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L2 cache: 1024 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,002 points. Launch price was $70.

Celeron T3300

The Celeron T3300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. Base frequency: 2 GHz. L3 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,005 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The A6-7000 is built on the Kaveri (2014−2015) architecture. In PassMark, the A6-7000 scores 1,002 against the Celeron T3300's 1,005 — a 0.3% lead for the Celeron T3300.

Feature	A6-7000	Celeron T3300
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	—
Boost Clock	3 GHz	—
Base Clock	2.2 GHz+10%	2 GHz
L3 Cache	—	1 MB
L2 Cache	1024 kB	—
Process	28 nm-38%	45 nm
Architecture	Kaveri (2014−2015)	—
PassMark	1,002	1,005

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A6-7000 uses the FT3 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron T3300 uses PGA478 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	A6-7000	Celeron T3300
Socket	FT3	PGA478
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	1600	—
Max RAM Capacity	16	—
RAM Channels	1	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: true (A6-7000) / not specified (Celeron T3300). The A6-7000 includes integrated graphics (Radeon R4 Graphics), while the Celeron T3300 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: A6-7000 rivals Pentium 3556U.

Feature	A6-7000	Celeron T3300
Integrated GPU	Yes	—
IGPU Model	Radeon R4 Graphics	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	true	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the A6-7000 was priced at $100, while the Celeron T3300 came in at $86. On launch pricing ($100 vs $86), Celeron T3300 was $14 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the A6-7000 delivers 10.0 pts/$ vs 11.7 pts/$ for the Celeron T3300 — making the Celeron T3300 the 15.4% better value option.

Feature	A6-7000	Celeron T3300
MSRP	$100	$86-14%
Performance per Dollar	10.0	11.7+17%
Release Date	2014	2010

Search A6-7000 on Amazon

Search Celeron T3300 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.