A8-3520M
VS
Celeron J4025

A8-3520M vs Celeron J4025

AMD

A8-3520M

4 Cores4 Thrd35 WWMax: 2.5 GHz2011
VS
Intel

Celeron J4025

2 Cores2 Thrd10 WWMax: 2.9 GHz2019

Performance Spectrum - CPU

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.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The A8-3520M is positioned at rank 806 and the Celeron J4025 is on rank 537, so the Celeron J4025 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar A8-3520M

#794
Atom x5-Z8300
MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A
1221%
#795
Atom Z3735G
MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A
1204%
#796
Core i5-480M
MSRP: $81|Avg: $77
1105%
#797
Core i5-460M
MSRP: $80|Avg: $129
1100%
#798
Core i5-2540M
MSRP: $266|Avg: $10
1090%
#800
Core i5-450M
MSRP: $32|Avg: $31
1052%
#801
Core i3-380M
MSRP: $49|Avg: $25
1009%
#802
Core i5-430M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33
1007%
#803
Core 2 Duo T6600
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4
980%
#806
A8-3520M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A
100%
#809
Athlon II M320
MSRP: $75|Avg: $15
100%
#810
Celeron B800
MSRP: $80|Avg: $5
99%
#811
Celeron B710
MSRP: $86|Avg: $10
99%
#812
Athlon II Neo K345
MSRP: $50|Avg: $10
99%
#818
Core i7-8709G
MSRP: $338|Avg: $150
98%
#819
Celeron M 560
MSRP: $86|Avg: $10
97%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron J4025

#1
Ryzen 9 7950X
MSRP: $194|Avg: $20
8599%
#2
Core i9-10900T
MSRP: $120|Avg: $5
8125%
#3
Ryzen 3 PRO 4355GE
MSRP: $423|Avg: $5
5900%
#4
Ryzen Threadripper 3960X
MSRP: $1399|Avg: $85
1777%
#5
Ryzen 9 9950X
MSRP: $649|Avg: $129
1408%
#6
Ryzen 5 8400F
MSRP: $303|Avg: $55
1232%
#7
Ryzen 7 PRO 2700
MSRP: $299|Avg: $60
705%
#8
Ryzen 5 2600X
MSRP: $229|Avg: $55
696%
#9
Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G
MSRP: $150|Avg: $60
634%
#10
Core Ultra 5 245KF
MSRP: $294|Avg: $189
634%
#11
Ryzen 5 5500
MSRP: $159|Avg: $85
627%
#12
Ryzen 5 3600
MSRP: $199|Avg: $80
610%
#13
Core i3-9100E
MSRP: $202|Avg: $30
601%
#14
Core Ultra 5 245K
MSRP: $319|Avg: $200
599%
#15
Core i3-8300T
MSRP: $138|Avg: $25
593%
#376
Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7945WX
MSRP: $1399|Avg: $1399
98%
#377
Core i3-9100HL
MSRP: $225|Avg: $100
95%
#378
Core i9-12900TE
MSRP: $494|Avg: $664
95%
#537
Celeron J4025
MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A
100%
#539
Athlon X4 850
MSRP: $77|Avg: $20
99%
#541
FX-6350
MSRP: $132|Avg: $55
97%
#542
Celeron G470
MSRP: $35|Avg: $10
97%
#543
Pentium G3220
MSRP: $54|Avg: $15
96%
#545
Athlon 5370
MSRP: $55|Avg: $15
96%
#548
Core i3-6100
MSRP: $125|Avg: $30
94%
#549
Core i3-6300T
MSRP: $117|Avg: $15
94%
#550
Core i3-6098P
MSRP: $117|Avg: $59
94%
#551
Core i7-7800X
MSRP: $383|Avg: $254
93%
#552
Core i3-7101TE
MSRP: $117|Avg: $60
93%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Generational Difference: This comparison involves processors from different technological eras. The Celeron J4025 (2019) utilizes 14 nm technology and DDR4, providing a fundamental performance advantage.
InsightA8-3520MCeleron J4025
Gaming
Lower gaming performance
Superior gaming performance
Workstation
Weaker in multi-core tasks
Better multi-core power
Price
Equivalent pricing
Equivalent pricing
Longevity
🛑 Legacy (Llano (2011−2012) / 32 nm)
✨ Modern (Gemini Lake Refresh (2019) / 14 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

The A8-3520M (2011) relies on 32 nm technology and DDR3, placing it in a different performance category relative to modern standards.
InsightA8-3520MCeleron J4025
Cost Efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost
Equivalent pricing
Equivalent pricing

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of A8-3520M and Celeron J4025

AMD

A8-3520M

The A8-3520M 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 2.5 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: 1,441 points. Launch price was $90.

Intel

Celeron J4025

The Celeron J4025 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 November 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Gemini Lake Refresh (2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2.9 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 4 MB (total). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1090. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,450 points. Launch price was $107.

Processing Power

The A8-3520M packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron J4025 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the A8-3520M has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the A8-3520M versus 2.9 GHz on the Celeron J4025 — a 14.8% clock advantage for the Celeron J4025 (base: 1.6 GHz vs 2 GHz). The A8-3520M uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron J4025 uses Gemini Lake Refresh (2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the A8-3520M scores 1,441 against the Celeron J4025's 1,450 — a 0.6% lead for the Celeron J4025. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A8-3520M vs 4 MB on the Celeron J4025.

FeatureA8-3520MCeleron J4025
Cores / Threads
4 / 4+100%
2 / 2
Boost Clock
2.5 GHz
2.9 GHz+16%
Base Clock
1.6 GHz
2 GHz+25%
L3 Cache
0 kB
4 MB
L2 Cache
1 MB (per core)
4 MB (total)+300%
Process
32 nm
14 nm-56%
Architecture
Llano (2011−2012)
Gemini Lake Refresh (2019)
PassMark
1,441
1,450
Geekbench 6 Single
255
🧠

Memory & Platform

The A8-3520M uses the FS1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron J4025 uses FCBGA1090 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the A8-3520M versus 2400 on the Celeron J4025 — the Celeron J4025 supports 199.5% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A8-3520M supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 20 (A8-3520M) vs 6 (Celeron J4025) — the A8-3520M offers 14 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

FeatureA8-3520MCeleron J4025
Socket
FS1
FCBGA1090
PCIe Generation
PCIe 2.0
PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed
DDR3-1333
2400+79900%
Max RAM Capacity
16 GB+209715100%
8
RAM Channels
2
2
ECC Support
PCIe Lanes
20+233%
6
🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A8-3520M) vs true (Celeron J4025). Both include integrated graphics Radeon HD 6620G (A8-3520M) and Intel UHD Graphics 600 (Celeron J4025) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A8-3520M targets Budget Laptop. Direct competitor: A8-3520M rivals Core i3-2330M; Celeron J4025 rivals Ryzen Embedded R1102G.

FeatureA8-3520MCeleron J4025
Integrated GPU
Yes
Yes
IGPU Model
Radeon HD 6620G
Intel UHD Graphics 600
Unlocked
No
No
AVX-512
No
No
Virtualization
AMD-V
true
Target Use
Budget Laptop