Pro A10-8700B vs A10-5750M

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

A10-5750M
2013
4 cores / 4 threads
1.41
Pro A10-8700B
2015
4 cores / 4 threads
1.43
+1.4%

Pro A10-8700B outperforms A10-5750M by 1% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

General info

Comparing A10-5750M and Pro A10-8700B processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking20852071
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-SeriesAMD Carrizo
Architecture codenameRichland (2013−2014)Carrizo (2015−2018)
Release date1 June 2013 (10 years ago)3 June 2015 (8 years ago)
Current price$198 $326

Technical specs

A10-5750M and Pro A10-8700B 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed2.5 GHz1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed3.5 GHz3.2 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache1 MB (per core)2048 KB
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography32 nm28 nm
Die size246 mm2no data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)71 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,178 million3100 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on A10-5750M and Pro A10-8700B 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 configuration1no data
SocketFS1r2FP4
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt12 - 35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A10-5750M and Pro A10-8700B. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, FMA, DDR3-1866 ControllerHSA 1.0
AES-NI+1
FMA+FMA4
AVX+AVX
FRTCno data1
FreeSyncno data1
PowerTuneno data-
TrueAudiono data+
PowerNowno data+
PowerGatingno data+
Out-of-band client managementno data+
VirusProtectno data+
RAIDno data+
HSAno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A10-5750M and Pro A10-8700B are enumerated here.

AMD-V+1
IOMMU 2.0no data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-5750M and Pro A10-8700B. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3/DDR3L-2133
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 8650GAMD Radeon R6 Graphics
iGPU core countno data6
Number of pipelinesno data384
Endurono data+
Switchable graphicsno data1
UVDno data+
VCEno data+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A10-5750M and Pro A10-8700B integrated GPUs.

DisplayPortno data+
HDMIno data+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A10-5750M and Pro A10-8700B integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkanno data1

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A10-5750M and Pro A10-8700B.

PCIe versionno data3.0

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.

A10-5750M 1.41
Pro A10-8700B 1.43
+1.4%

Pro A10-8700B outperforms A10-5750M by 1% based on our aggregated 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%

A10-5750M 2174
Pro A10-8700B 2217
+2%

Pro A10-8700B outperforms A10-5750M by 2% 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%

A10-5750M 308
Pro A10-8700B 474
+53.9%

Pro A10-8700B outperforms A10-5750M by 54% 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%

A10-5750M 690
Pro A10-8700B 999
+44.8%

Pro A10-8700B outperforms A10-5750M by 45% 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%

A10-5750M 2579
+17.2%
Pro A10-8700B 2200

A10-5750M outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 17% 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%

A10-5750M 6451
+9.2%
Pro A10-8700B 5907

A10-5750M outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 9% 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%

A10-5750M 3238
+15.7%
Pro A10-8700B 2798

A10-5750M outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 16% 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%

A10-5750M 22.5
+36.4%
Pro A10-8700B 30.7

Pro A10-8700B outperforms A10-5750M by 36% 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%

A10-5750M 2
+0.9%
Pro A10-8700B 2

A10-5750M outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 1% 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%

A10-5750M 209
+8.9%
Pro A10-8700B 192

A10-5750M outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 9% 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%

A10-5750M 76
+8.6%
Pro A10-8700B 70

A10-5750M outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 9% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark 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 loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

A10-5750M 0.85
+3.7%
Pro A10-8700B 0.82

A10-5750M outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 4% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A10-5750M 1.5
+76.5%
Pro A10-8700B 0.9

A10-5750M outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 76% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A10-5750M 2035
+127%
Pro A10-8700B 897

A10-5750M outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 127% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A10-5750M 76
+67.4%
Pro A10-8700B 45

A10-5750M outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 67% in x264 encoding pass 1.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A10-5750M 15
+65.4%
Pro A10-8700B 9

A10-5750M outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 65% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

A10-5750M 1816
+91.2%
Pro A10-8700B 950

A10-5750M outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 91% in Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core.

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

A10-5750M 4787
+75.5%
Pro A10-8700B 2728

A10-5750M outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 75% in Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core.

Gaming performance

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 1.41 1.43
Integrated graphics card 1.36
Recency 1 June 2013 3 June 2015
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 12 Watt

We couldn't decide between A10-5750M and Pro A10-8700B. The differences in performance seem too small.


Should you still have questions on choice between A10-5750M and Pro A10-8700B, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD A10-5750M
A10-5750M
AMD Pro A10-8700B
Pro A10-8700B

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.

User Ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.8 244 votes

Rate A10-5750M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 46 votes

Rate Pro A10-8700B on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about A10-5750M or Pro A10-8700B, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.