A6-9220C vs Celeron N2940

A6-9220C vs Celeron N2940 Performance Spectrum

A6-9220C

2 / 2

1,053

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron N2940

4 / 4

1,054

+0.1%

Core Duo T2050

Celeron N3000

Celeron J1800

Pentium Dual-Core E2180

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.

A6-9220C vs Celeron N2940 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.

A6-9220C vs Celeron N2940: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A6-9220C

2019

Why buy it

✅Draws 6W instead of 7W, a 1W reduction.
✅100% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 4) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,053 vs 1,054).

Celeron N2940

2014

Why buy it

✅+0.1% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌16.7% higher power demand at 7W vs 6W.

Quick Answers

So, is A6-9220C better than Celeron N2940?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A6-9220C is ahead with a 0.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron N2940 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 N2940 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

A6-9220C still makes the most sense overall. A6-9220C comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

A6-9220C makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2019 vs 2014). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A6-9220C vs Celeron N2940 Technical Specifications

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

A6-9220C

The A6-9220C is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.7 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB (total). Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT4. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,053 points. Launch price was $70.

Celeron N2940

The Celeron N2940 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.83 GHz, with boost up to 2.25 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 7.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,054 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The A6-9220C packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Celeron N2940 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Celeron N2940 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.7 GHz on the A6-9220C versus 2.25 GHz on the Celeron N2940 — a 18.2% clock advantage for the A6-9220C (base: 1.8 GHz vs 1.83 GHz). The A6-9220C uses the Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Celeron N2940 uses Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the A6-9220C scores 1,053 against the Celeron N2940's 1,054 — a 0.1% lead for the Celeron N2940.

Feature	A6-9220C	Celeron N2940
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	2.7 GHz+20%	2.25 GHz
Base Clock	1.8 GHz	1.83 GHz+2%
L3 Cache	—	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB (total)	512K (per core)+51100%
Process	28 nm	22 nm-21%
Architecture	Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)	Bay Trail-M (2013−2014)
PassMark	1,053	1,054
Geekbench 6 Single	—	240
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	850

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A6-9220C uses the FT4 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Celeron N2940 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-1866 on the A6-9220C versus DDR3L-1333 on the Celeron N2940 — the A6-9220C supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 8 GB of RAM. Memory channels: 1 (A6-9220C) vs 2 (Celeron N2940). PCIe lanes: 8 (A6-9220C) vs 4 (Celeron N2940) — the A6-9220C offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD BGA soldered (A6-9220C) and SoC (Celeron N2940).

Feature	A6-9220C	Celeron N2940
Socket	FT4	FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-1866+40%	DDR3L-1333
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	8 GB
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	8+100%	4

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (A6-9220C) / VT-x (Celeron N2940). Both include integrated graphics — AMD Radeon R5 (A6-9220C) and Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (Celeron N2940) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron N2940 targets Budget Laptop. Direct competitor: Celeron N2940 rivals AMD A6-6310.