Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS
Front view of AMD A4 4000

AMD A4 4000

CPUBoss Winner

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Celeron B815

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron B815

Report a correction
Significantly lower typical power consumption 28.44W vs 52.81W More than 45% lower typical power consumption
Much higher Maximum operating temperature 100 °C vs 70 °C Around 45% higher Maximum operating temperature
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year vs 15.66 $/year More than 45% lower annual home energy cost
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year vs 56.94 $/year More than 45% lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of AMD A4 4000

Reasons to consider the
AMD A4 4000

Report a correction
Much better performance per dollar 7.8 pt/$ vs 0.99 pt/$ More than 7.8x better performance per dollar
Much higher clock speed 3 GHz vs 1.6 GHz More than 85% higher clock speed
Much better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score 2,502 vs 2,017 Around 25% better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score
More l2 cache 1 MB vs 0.5 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.02 GHz vs 1.6 GHz More than 2.5x better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Significantly better performance per watt 5.4 pt/W vs 2.44 pt/W Around 2.2x better performance per watt
Higher GPU clock speed 720 MHz vs 650 MHz More than 10% higher GPU clock speed
More l2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Better geekbench 3 single core score 1,622 vs 1,202 Around 35% better geekbench 3 single core score
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.49 GHz vs 1.6 GHz Around 2.2x better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Newer May, 2013 vs Jan, 2012 Release date over 1 years later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron B815 vs A4 4000

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Celeron B815
2,090
A4 4000
2,519

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Celeron B815
1,202
A4 4000
1,622

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Celeron B815
78,800 MB/s
A4 4000
1,830,000 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Celeron B815
2,017
A4 4000
2,502

GeekBench

Celeron B815
2,635
A4 4000
2,502

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Celeron B815
1,368
A4 4000
1,809

PassMark (Single Core)

A4 4000
1,103

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron B815  vs
A4 4000 
Clock speed 1.6 GHz 3 GHz
Cores Dual core Dual core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
AVX 1.1
SSE2
F16C
MMX
SSE4
XOP
AVX
SSE3
SSE
BMI1
AMD64
SSE4.1
FMA4
FMA3
SSE4.2
ABM
CVT16
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
AES
TBM
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 35W 65W
Annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year 15.66 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year 56.94 $/year
Performance per watt 2.44 pt/W 5.4 pt/W
Typical power consumption 28.44W 52.81W

details

Celeron B815  vs
A4 4000 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 2 2
L2 cache 0.5 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Operating temperature Unknown - 100°C Unknown - 70°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 1.6 GHz 4.02 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.6 GHz 3.49 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 1.6 GHz 4.02 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU GPU
Label Intel® HD Graphics Radeon™ HD 7480D
GPU clock speed 650 MHz 720 MHz

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1333
DDR3-1066
DDR3
Intel Celeron B815
Report a correction
AMD A4 4000
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus