Celeron Dual-Core T3500 vs A4-4020
Celeron Dual-Core T3500
A4-4020
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 Celeron Dual-Core T3500 is positioned at rank 959 and the A4-4020 is on rank 768, so the A4-4020 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron Dual-Core T3500
Performance Per Dollar A4-4020
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron Dual-Core T3500 | A4-4020 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Penryn (2008−2011) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Richland (2013−2014) / 32 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron Dual-Core T3500 | A4-4020 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
Performance Check
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 Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and A4-4020
Celeron Dual-Core T3500
The Celeron Dual-Core T3500 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 26 September 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2.1 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: P. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,275 points. Launch price was $80.
A4-4020
The A4-4020 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Richland (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB (total). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1333. Passmark benchmark score: 1,269 points. Launch price was $50.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and A4-4020 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.1 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core T3500 versus 3.4 GHz on the A4-4020 — a 47.3% clock advantage for the A4-4020. The Celeron Dual-Core T3500 uses the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the A4-4020 uses Richland (2013−2014) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron Dual-Core T3500 scores 1,275 against the A4-4020's 1,269 — a 0.5% lead for the Celeron Dual-Core T3500.
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T3500 | A4-4020 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.1 GHz | 3.4 GHz+62% |
| Base Clock | — | 3.2 GHz |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB (total) |
| Process | 45 nm | 32 nm-29% |
| Architecture | Penryn (2008−2011) | Richland (2013−2014) |
| PassMark | 1,275 | 1,269 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 341 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron Dual-Core T3500 uses the P socket (PCIe 1.1), while the A4-4020 uses FM2 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 800 on the Celeron Dual-Core T3500 versus DDR3-1333 on the A4-4020 — the Celeron Dual-Core T3500 supports 198.5% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A4-4020 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: 0 (Celeron Dual-Core T3500) vs 16 (A4-4020) — the A4-4020 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: GL40,GM45,GM47 (Celeron Dual-Core T3500) and A55,A58,A68H,A75,A78,A88X (A4-4020).
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T3500 | A4-4020 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | P | FM2 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 3.0+173% |
| Max RAM Speed | 800+26567% | DDR3-1333 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 | 16 GB+209715100% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: false (Celeron Dual-Core T3500) vs AMD-V (A4-4020). The A4-4020 includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 7480D), while the Celeron Dual-Core T3500 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron Dual-Core T3500 targets Budget, A4-4020 targets Budget Desktop. Direct competitor: Celeron Dual-Core T3500 rivals Pentium T4400; A4-4020 rivals Pentium G3220.
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T3500 | A4-4020 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Radeon HD 7480D |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | false | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Budget | Budget Desktop |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron Dual-Core T3500 and A4-4020
