CPU Comparison

The Intel Celeron G6900TE and AMD PRO A10-9700E are both 35 W desktop processors aimed at similar low-power segments, but benchmark data reveals a consistent, if narrow, performance edge for the Intel part across all tested Cinebench workloads. The Intel Celeron G6900TE wins all five head-to-head comparisons, with deltas ranging from 4.2% to 4.6%, despite having half the core count of its AMD rival. This outcome suggests that architectural efficiency and per-core throughput outweigh raw core quantity in these specific rendering tests, a pattern worth examining closely given the AMD part’s higher base clock and boost capability.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive Intel victory occurs in the Cinebench R20 single-core test, where the Celeron G6900TE scores 159 against the PRO A10-9700E’s 152, a 4.6% advantage. This is the largest delta between the two chips in any benchmark. The single-core gap carries over to Cinebench R23, where Intel posts 379 versus AMD’s 363, again a 4.4% lead. These single-threaded results are particularly telling because the AMD processor has a 3.00 GHz base clock and a 3.50 GHz boost clock, while the Intel part runs at a fixed 2.40 GHz with no boost capability. The data indicates that the Alder Lake architecture’s per-clock efficiency more than compensates for the 600 MHz clock deficit.

Multi-core results tell a similar story, though with slightly smaller margins. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Celeron G6900TE scores 270 versus 259 for the AMD PRO A10-9700E, a 4.2% win. The Cinebench R20 multi-core test shows Intel at 1128 and AMD at 1081, a 4.3% margin. The pattern holds in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where Intel scores 2687 against AMD’s 2574, a 4.4% difference. This is remarkable because the AMD chip has four physical cores and four threads, while the Intel Celeron has only two cores and two threads. The fact that a dual-core processor consistently outperforms a quad-core one in multi-threaded workloads suggests that the AMD Excavator architecture’s heavily shared resources or lower instructions-per-clock are significant liabilities.

The average benchmark scores reflect this overall trend: the Celeron G6900TE averages 925 points across its benchmark suite, while the PRO A10-9700E averages 919 points. Both processors sit at the 25th percentile among all CPUs, placing them in the same performance tier overall, but the Intel chip edges ahead by roughly 0.7% on average. Interestingly, the nearest rival data shows both chips clustering around similar competition: the AMD FX-4320 appears as a rival for both, with a 0.4% delta for Intel and a -0.2% delta for AMD, suggesting these two processors are essentially peers in the broader market context.

The Verdict

From the benchmark data alone, the Intel Celeron G6900TE is the superior choice for anyone prioritizing raw compute performance in Cinebench-style workloads. It wins every single head-to-head comparison, with margins between 4.2% and 4.6%, and it does so while consuming the same 35 W TDP as the AMD part. The data shows no scenario where the AMD PRO A10-9700E comes out ahead, making the Intel chip the clear winner for users whose workloads resemble these multi-threaded and single-threaded rendering tests.

However, the AMD PRO A10-9700E is not without merit, particularly for users who value additional cores for non-benchmarked tasks or who need a specific platform feature set. The AMD chip offers four cores and four threads versus Intel’s two and two, which could theoretically benefit workloads not measured by Cinebench, such as lightly threaded multitasking or background processes. Additionally, the AMD part’s integrated Radeon R7 graphics may be more capable than Intel’s UHD Graphics 710, though the data does not include graphics benchmarks to confirm this advantage. The AMD processor also has a higher base clock (3.00 GHz versus 2.40 GHz) and a boost clock of 3.50 GHz, which could help in bursty single-threaded scenarios, though the Cinebench single-core results suggest otherwise.

For a strictly compute-focused purchase, the Intel Celeron G6900TE wins. For users who need four physical cores or prefer the AMD AM4 platform for other reasons, the PRO A10-9700E remains a viable option, but the benchmark data offers no performance justification for choosing it over the Intel part.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from vastly different architectural eras and design philosophies. The Intel Celeron G6900TE is built on Alder Lake architecture, specifically the Alder Lake-S codename, using a 10 nm process node from Intel’s own fabs. It has two cores and two threads, with 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, plus 4 MB of shared L3 cache. This modern design emphasizes per-core efficiency and high instructions-per-clock, which explains its strong single-threaded performance despite the low 2.40 GHz clock speed.

The AMD PRO A10-9700E uses the much older Excavator architecture, codenamed Bristol Ridge, manufactured on a 28 nm process by GlobalFoundries. It features four cores and four threads, with 320 KB of L1 cache and 2 MB of L2 cache, but notably no L3 cache at all. The architecture dates to a time when AMD relied on heavily shared floating-point units and module-based designs, which historically performed poorly in single-threaded workloads. The 3,100 million transistors on a 250 mm² die reflect this older, less dense process.

Memory support also differs significantly. The Intel chip supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode, while the AMD part supports only DDR4. The AMD chip’s memory bandwidth is specified at 38.4 GB/s, whereas the Intel chip’s bandwidth is not listed in the data. PCIe support is another differentiator: Intel offers Gen 5, while AMD offers Gen 3 with 8 lanes from the CPU only. These architectural differences explain why the Intel chip can achieve competitive or superior performance with half the cores and a lower clock speed.

Specification Differences

Several specification fields differ between the two processors, and these differences help contextualize the benchmark results. The core count is the most obvious: Intel provides 2 cores and 2 threads, while AMD provides 4 cores and 4 threads. Base clocks are 2.40 GHz for Intel and 3.00 GHz for AMD, with only AMD offering a boost clock at 3.50 GHz. The process node is 10 nm for Intel versus 28 nm for AMD, and the foundries are Intel and GlobalFoundries, respectively.

Cache configurations diverge substantially. Intel uses 80 KB L1 per core and 1.25 MB L2 per core, plus 4 MB shared L3. AMD uses 320 KB L1 total and 2 MB L2 total, with no L3 cache. Memory support is DDR4/DDR5 for Intel versus DDR4-only for AMD, and PCIe is Gen 5 for Intel versus Gen 3 with 8 lanes for AMD. The integrated graphics differ: Intel has UHD Graphics 710, while AMD has Radeon R7. The AMD chip’s die size is 250 mm² with 3,100 million transistors, while Intel’s die size and transistor count are not listed. Release dates are also far apart: Intel launched on 2022-01-03, while AMD launched on 2016-10-02. Both have a 35 W TDP, neither has an unlocked multiplier, and both lack ECC memory support.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Celeron G6900TE scores 379, while the AMD PRO A10-9700E scores 363, giving Intel a 4.4% advantage.

Q: Does the AMD PRO A10-9700E have more cores than the Intel Celeron G6900TE?

A: Yes, the AMD processor has 4 cores and 4 threads, while the Intel processor has 2 cores and 2 threads.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two chips?

A: The Intel Celeron G6900TE averages 925 points, and the AMD PRO A10-9700E averages 919 points, a difference of 6 points or roughly 0.7%.

Q: Which processor supports DDR5 memory?

A: Only the Intel Celeron G6900TE supports DDR5; the AMD PRO A10-9700E supports DDR4 only.

Q: How do the two chips compare in Cinebench R15 multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Celeron G6900TE scores 270, and the AMD PRO A10-9700E scores 259, with Intel winning by 4.2%.

Q: Do both processors have the same TDP?

A: Yes, both the Intel Celeron G6900TE and the AMD PRO A10-9700E have a 35 W TDP.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Celeron G6900TE wins in every benchmark category where both chips were tested. This includes all five Cinebench workloads: R15 multi-core, R20 multi-core, R20 single-core, R23 multi-core, and R23 single-core. The Intel chip’s dominance is consistent, with margins between 4.2% and 4.6% across the board. Users running CPU-intensive rendering tasks, whether single-threaded or multi-threaded, will see better performance from the Intel part. The data also suggests that the Intel chip’s modern architecture provides better per-watt performance, as it achieves these results at the same 35 W TDP as the AMD chip, despite having a lower clock speed and fewer cores.

The AMD PRO A10-9700E’s wins are not reflected in the benchmark data, as it loses all five head-to-head comparisons. However, the specification sheet reveals areas where it could theoretically excel outside of Cinebench. Its four cores and four threads could be beneficial for workloads that scale with core count but are not memory-bandwidth-bound or architecture-sensitive, such as running multiple virtual machines or heavily threaded background tasks. The AMD chip’s higher base clock (3.00 GHz) and boost clock (3.50 GHz) could also provide snappier responsiveness in bursty, short-duration tasks that do not sustain load long enough for the architecture’s lower efficiency to matter. Additionally, the AMD part’s Radeon R7 integrated graphics may offer better iGPU performance than Intel’s UHD Graphics 710, though no graphics benchmarks are included in the data to confirm this. The AMD chip’s older AM4 platform and Gen 3 PCIe support might be preferable for users with existing AM4 motherboards or older PCIe devices, while the Intel chip’s Gen 5 PCIe and DDR5 support look toward future upgrades. Ultimately, the benchmark data gives Intel the clear performance win, but the AMD part’s core count and higher clocks keep it relevant for specific, non-rendering use cases.