Celeron Dual-Core T3500 vs A6-3410MX
Celeron Dual-Core T3500
A6-3410MX
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 A6-3410MX is on rank 850, so the A6-3410MX 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 A6-3410MX
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron Dual-Core T3500 | A6-3410MX |
|---|---|---|
| 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 (Llano (2011−2012) / 32 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron Dual-Core T3500 | A6-3410MX |
|---|---|---|
| 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 A6-3410MX
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.
A6-3410MX
The A6-3410MX 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 2.3 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FS1. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,274 points. Launch price was $70.
Processing Power
The Celeron Dual-Core T3500 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the A6-3410MX offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the A6-3410MX has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.1 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core T3500 versus 2.3 GHz on the A6-3410MX — a 9.1% clock advantage for the A6-3410MX. The Celeron Dual-Core T3500 uses the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the A6-3410MX uses Llano (2011−2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron Dual-Core T3500 scores 1,275 against the A6-3410MX's 1,274 — a 0.1% lead for the Celeron Dual-Core T3500.
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T3500 | A6-3410MX |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 4 / 4+100% |
| Boost Clock | 2.1 GHz | 2.3 GHz+10% |
| Base Clock | — | 1.6 GHz |
| L3 Cache | — | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB (per core) |
| Process | 45 nm | 32 nm-29% |
| Architecture | Penryn (2008−2011) | Llano (2011−2012) |
| PassMark | 1,275 | 1,274 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 271 |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron Dual-Core T3500 uses the P socket (PCIe 1.1), while the A6-3410MX uses FS1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 800 on the Celeron Dual-Core T3500 versus DDR3-1600 on the A6-3410MX — the Celeron Dual-Core T3500 supports 198.5% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 8 of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Celeron Dual-Core T3500) vs 16 (A6-3410MX) — the A6-3410MX offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T3500 | A6-3410MX |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | P | FS1 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | 800+26567% | DDR3-1600 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 | 8 GB+104857500% |
| 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 (A6-3410MX). The A6-3410MX includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 6520G), while the Celeron Dual-Core T3500 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron Dual-Core T3500 targets Budget, A6-3410MX targets Mainstream Laptop. Direct competitor: Celeron Dual-Core T3500 rivals Pentium T4400; A6-3410MX rivals Core i3-2330M.
| Feature | Celeron Dual-Core T3500 | A6-3410MX |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Radeon HD 6520G |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | false | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Budget | Mainstream Laptop |
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 A6-3410MX
