Core 2 Duo P8600 vs A10-4600M
Aggregate performance score
A10-4600M outperforms Core 2 Duo P8600 by a whopping 127% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A10-4600M and Core 2 Duo P8600 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2218 | 2733 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD A-Series | Intel Core 2 Duo |
| Architecture codename | Trinity (2012−2013) | Penryn (2008−2011) |
| Release date | 15 May 2012 (12 years ago) | 15 July 2008 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $209 |
| Current price | $222 | $31 (0.1x MSRP) |
Detailed specifications
A10-4600M and Core 2 Duo P8600 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.3 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.2 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Bus support | no data | 1066 MHz |
| L1 cache | 192 KB | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 3 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 3 MB L2 Cache |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | 81 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 274 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1.05V-1.15V |
Compatibility
Information on A10-4600M and Core 2 Duo P8600 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | no data |
| Socket | FS1r2 | BGA479,PBGA479,PGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 25 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A10-4600M and Core 2 Duo P8600. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, FMA | no data |
| AES-NI | + | no data |
| FMA | + | no data |
| AVX | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| FSB parity | no data | - |
| Status | no data | Discontinued |
Security technologies
A10-4600M and Core 2 Duo P8600 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A10-4600M and Core 2 Duo P8600 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | no data |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-4600M and Core 2 Duo P8600. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon HD 7660G | no data |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
A10-4600M outperforms Core 2 Duo P8600 by 127% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
A10-4600M outperforms Core 2 Duo P8600 by 129% in Passmark.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
A10-4600M outperforms Core 2 Duo P8600 by 23% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
A10-4600M outperforms Core 2 Duo P8600 by 59% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.
Benchmark coverage: 20%
Core 2 Duo P8600 outperforms A10-4600M by 26% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.
Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
A10-4600M outperforms Core 2 Duo P8600 by 16% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.
3DMark06 CPU
3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
A10-4600M outperforms Core 2 Duo P8600 by 33% in 3DMark06 CPU.
wPrime 32
wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.
Benchmark coverage: 18%
Core 2 Duo P8600 outperforms A10-4600M by 31% in wPrime 32.
Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.
Benchmark coverage: 17%
A10-4600M outperforms Core 2 Duo P8600 by 47% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.
Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.
Benchmark coverage: 15%
A10-4600M outperforms Core 2 Duo P8600 by 58% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.
Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core
Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.
Benchmark coverage: 15%
Core 2 Duo P8600 outperforms A10-4600M by 3% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.
Geekbench 2
Benchmark coverage: 5%
A10-4600M outperforms Core 2 Duo P8600 by 36% in Geekbench 2.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.25 | 0.55 |
| Recency | 15 May 2012 | 15 July 2008 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 25 Watt |
The A10-4600M is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Duo P8600 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between A10-4600M and Core 2 Duo P8600, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
