A8-3800 vs Celeron M 585

A8-3800 vs Celeron M 585 Performance Spectrum

A8-3800

4 / 4

2,051

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron M 585

1 / 1

2,062

+0.5%

Celeron J1900

Core Duo T2300

Pentium Dual Core T2370

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.

A8-3800 vs Celeron M 585 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.

A8-3800 vs Celeron M 585: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A8-3800

2011

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 6550D, while Celeron M 585 needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Stock Cooler), unlike Celeron M 585.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,051 vs 2,062).
❌Launch MSRP is still $130 MSRP, while Celeron M 585 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌6400% higher power demand at 65W vs 1W.

Celeron M 585

2008

Why buy it

✅+0.5% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 1W instead of 65W, a 64W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌No integrated graphics, while A8-3800 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A8-3800.

Quick Answers

So, is A8-3800 better than Celeron M 585?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A8-3800 is ahead with a 1.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Celeron M 585 pulls ahead with 0.5% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Celeron M 585 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.5% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

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

A8-3800 is the better buy right now. A8-3800 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $130 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Celeron M 585 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.5% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (15.8 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

A8-3800 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2008). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A8-3800 vs Celeron M 585 Technical Specifications

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

A8-3800

The A8-3800 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 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.7 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM1. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,051 points. Launch price was $90.

Celeron M 585

The Celeron M 585 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 August 2008 (17 years ago). It is based on the Merom (2006−2008) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.16 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 2,062 points. Launch price was $70.

⚡

Processing Power

The A8-3800 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Celeron M 585 offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the A8-3800 has 3 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.7 GHz on the A8-3800 versus 2.16 GHz on the Celeron M 585 — a 22.2% clock advantage for the A8-3800. The A8-3800 uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Celeron M 585 uses Merom (2006−2008) (65 nm). In PassMark, the A8-3800 scores 2,051 against the Celeron M 585's 2,062 — a 0.5% lead for the Celeron M 585.

Feature	A8-3800	Celeron M 585
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+300%	1 / 1
Boost Clock	2.7 GHz+25%	2.16 GHz
Base Clock	2.4 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	—
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	1 MB
Process	32 nm-51%	65 nm
Architecture	Llano (2011−2012)	Merom (2006−2008)
PassMark	2,051	2,062
Geekbench 6 Single	370	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	1,350	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A8-3800 uses the FM1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron M 585 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1866 on the A8-3800 versus 800 on the Celeron M 585 — the A8-3800 supports 133.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A8-3800 supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 700% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (A8-3800) vs 0 (Celeron M 585) — the A8-3800 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: A55,A75 (A8-3800) and GL40,GM45 (Celeron M 585).

Feature	A8-3800	Celeron M 585
Socket	FM1	PGA478
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0+82%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1866+133%	800
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB+700%	4 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A8-3800) vs false (Celeron M 585). The A8-3800 includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 6550D), while the Celeron M 585 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A8-3800 targets Budget Desktop. Direct competitor: A8-3800 rivals Core i3-2100; Celeron M 585 rivals Mobile Sempron SI-40.