Select any two CPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game APU A6-4455M Dual-Core Celeron Dual-Core 867 1.3GHz
Cyberpunk 2077 592% 608%
Assassins Creed: Valhalla 832% 854%
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War 571% 587%
Watch Dogs Legion 832% 854%
FIFA 21 547% 563%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 684% 703%
Godfall 1237% 1268%
Grand Theft Auto VI 1038% 1064%
World of Warcraft: Shadowlands 976% 1001%
Genshin Impact 424% 436%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the AMD APU A6-4455M Dual-Core is marginally better than the Intel Celeron Dual-Core 867 1.3GHz when it comes to running the latest games. This also means it will be less likely to bottleneck more powerful GPUs, allowing them to achieve more of their gaming performance potential.

The APU A6-4455M Dual-Core was released less than a year after the Celeron Dual-Core 867, and so they are likely to have similar levels of support, and similarly optimized performance when running the latest games.

The APU A6-4455M Dual-Core and the Celeron Dual-Core 867 both have 2 cores, and so are quite likely to struggle with the latest games, or at least bottleneck high-end graphics cards when running them. With a decent accompanying GPU, the APU A6-4455M Dual-Core and the Celeron Dual-Core 867 may still be able to run slightly older games fairly effectively.

More important for gaming than the number of cores and threads is the clock rate. Problematically, unless the two CPUs are from the same family, this can only serve as a general guide and nothing like an exact comparison, because the clock cycles per instruction (CPI) will vary so much.

The APU A6-4455M Dual-Core and Celeron Dual-Core 867 are not from the same family of CPUs, so their clock speeds are by no means directly comparable. Bear in mind, then, that while the APU A6-4455M Dual-Core has a 0.8 GHz faster frequency, this is not always an indicator that it will be superior in performance, despite frequency being crucial when trying to avoid GPU bottlenecking. In this case, however, the difference is probably a good indicator that the is superior.

Aside from the clock rate, the next-most important CPU features for PC game performance are L2 and L3 cache size. Faster than RAM, the more cache available, the more data that can be stored for lightning-fast retrieval. L1 Cache is not usually an issue anymore for gaming, with most high-end CPUs eking out about the same L1 performance, and L2 is more important than L3 - but L3 is still important if you want to reach the highest levels of performance. Bear in mind that although it is better to have a larger cache, the larger it is, the higher the latency, so a balance has to be struck.

The APU A6-4455M Dual-Core has a 1536 KB bigger L2 cache than the Celeron Dual-Core 867, and although the APU A6-4455M Dual-Core does not appear to have an L3 cache, its larger L2 cache means that it wins out in this area.

The maximum Thermal Design Power is the power in Watts that the CPU will consume in the worst case scenario. The lithography is the semiconductor manufacturing technology being used to create the CPU - the smaller this is, the more transistors that can be fit into the CPU, and the closer the connections. For both the lithography and the TDP, it is the lower the better, because a lower number means a lower amount of power is necessary to run the CPU, and consequently a lower amount of heat is produced.

Both the APU A6-4455M Dual-Core and the Celeron Dual-Core 867 have the same TDP of 17 Watts, and were created with the same manufacturing size of 32 nm, which means they will affect your yearly electricity bill about equally.

The APU A6-4455M Dual-Core has an on-board GPU, which means that it will be capable of running basic graphics applications (i.e., games) without the need for a dedicated graphics card. The Celeron Dual-Core 867, however, does not, and you will probably have to look for a dedicated card if you wish to use it at all.

For in-depth GPU comparisons with the Radeon HD 7500G, click on the following GPU overview comparison icon (visible throughout Game-Debate), and choose a GPU from the list to compare against:

On-board GPUs tend to be fairly awful in comparison to dedicated cards from the likes of AMD or Nvidia, but as they are built into the CPU, they also tend to be cheaper and require far less power to run (this makes them a good choice for laptops). We would recommend a dedicated card for running the latest games, but integrated GPUs are improving all the time and casual gamers may find less recent games perform perfectly acceptably.

CPU Core Details

CPU CodenameTrinitySandy Bridge
MoBo SocketBGA 827(FP2)BGA 1023
Notebook CPUyesyes
Release Date15 May 201201 Jan 2012
CPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved

CPU Technical Specifications

CPU Cores2vs2
Clock Speed2.1 GHzvs1.3 GHz
Turbo Frequency-vs-
Max TDP17 Wvs17 W
Lithography32 nmvs32 nm
Bit Width-vs-
Virtualization Technologynovsno
Comparison

CPU Cache and Memory

L1 Cache Size96 KBvs128 KB
L2 Cache Size2048 KBvs512 KB
L3 Cache Size-vs2 MB
ECC Memory Supportnovsno
Comparison

CPU Graphics

GraphicsRadeon HD 7500Gno
Base GPU Frequency327 MHzvs-
Max GPU Frequency-vs-
DirectX11.1vs-
Displays Supported-vs-
Comparison

CPU Package and Version Specifications

Package Size-vs-
Revision-vs-
PCIe Revision-vs-
PCIe Configurations-vs-

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

CPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewHeterogeneous System Architecture ("HSA"), formerly known as Fusion System Architecture ("FSA"), is the marketing name for a series of APUs by AMD, aimed at providing good performance with low power consumption, and integrating a central processing unit (CPU) and graphics processing unit (GPU) based on a mobile stand-alone GPU. Fusion was announced in 2006 and has been in development since then. The final design is the product of the merger between AMD and ATI, combining general processor execution as well as 3D geometry processing and other functions of modern GPUs (like GPGPU computation) into a single die. This technology was shown to the general public in January 2011 at CES. Second-generation "Trinity" parts released in June 2012.Sandy Bridge is the codename for a microarchitecture developed by Intel beginning in 2005 for central processing units in computers to replace the Nehalem microarchitecture. Intel demonstrated a Sandy Bridge processor in 2009, and released first products based on the architecture in January 2011 under the Core brand.