A8-3500M vs Celeron 1020E

A8-3500M vs Celeron 1020E Performance Spectrum

A8-3500M

4 / 4

1,391

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron 1020E

2 / 2

1,406

+1.1%

Celeron B820

Pentium Dual-Core E2180

Pentium E5700

Celeron Dual-Core SU2300

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.

A8-3500M vs Celeron 1020E 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.

A8-3500M vs Celeron 1020E: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A8-3500M

2011

Why buy it

✅Draws 35W instead of 512W, a 477W reduction.
✅25% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 16) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,391 vs 1,406).

Celeron 1020E

2013

Why buy it

✅+1.1% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $86 MSRP, while A8-3500M mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌1362.9% higher power demand at 512W vs 35W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron 1020E better than A8-3500M?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A8-3500M is ahead with a 1.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron 1020E pulls ahead with 1.1% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron 1020E is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron 1020E is the better buy right now. Celeron 1020E comes in at an unclear MSRP at $86 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 1.1% better PassMark. The compromise is that A8-3500M is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 1.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (16.3 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 1020E 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 2 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.

A8-3500M vs Celeron 1020E Technical Specifications

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

A8-3500M

The A8-3500M 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 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 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: 1,391 points. Launch price was $90.

Celeron 1020E

The Celeron 1020E is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: G2. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB + 2 MB. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,406 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The A8-3500M packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron 1020E offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the A8-3500M has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the A8-3500M versus 2.2 GHz on the Celeron 1020E — a 8.7% clock advantage for the A8-3500M (base: 1.5 GHz vs 2.2 GHz). The A8-3500M uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron 1020E uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the A8-3500M scores 1,391 against the Celeron 1020E's 1,406 — a 1.1% lead for the Celeron 1020E. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A8-3500M vs 2 MB (total) on the Celeron 1020E.

Feature	A8-3500M	Celeron 1020E
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.4 GHz+9%	2.2 GHz
Base Clock	1.5 GHz	2.2 GHz+47%
L3 Cache	0 kB	2 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	256K (per core)+25500%
Process	32 nm	22 nm-31%
Architecture	Llano (2011−2012)	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
PassMark	1,391	1,406+1%
Geekbench 6 Single	231	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A8-3500M uses the FS1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron 1020E uses G2 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the A8-3500M versus DDR3-1600 on the Celeron 1020E — the Celeron 1020E supports 20% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 16 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 20 (A8-3500M) vs 16 (Celeron 1020E) — the A8-3500M offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A8-3500M	Celeron 1020E
Socket	FS1	G2
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	DDR3-1600+20%
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	16 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	20+25%	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A8-3500M) vs VT-x (Celeron 1020E). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 6620G (A8-3500M) and HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) (Celeron 1020E) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A8-3500M targets Budget Laptop, Celeron 1020E targets Budget. Direct competitor: A8-3500M rivals Core i3-2310M; Celeron 1020E rivals Pentium 2020M.