Athlon MP 2800+ vs A10-5800K
Primary details
Comparing A10-5800K and Athlon MP 2800+ processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1980 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.26 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Server |
| Series | AMD A-Series (Desktop) | AMD Athlon MP |
| Power efficiency | 1.76 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Trinity (2012−2013) | K7 (2000−2004) |
| Release date | 2 October 2012 (12 years ago) | 6 May 2003 (21 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $122 | $275 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
A10-5800K and Athlon MP 2800+ 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 3.8 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 4.2 GHz | 2.13 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | FSB |
| Bus rate | no data | 266 MT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 16 |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 130 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | 101 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 54 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on A10-5800K and Athlon MP 2800+ 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 | 2 (Multiprocessor) |
| Socket | FM2 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 60 Watt |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A10-5800K and Athlon MP 2800+ are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-5800K and Athlon MP 2800+. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | no data |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 4 GB |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon HD 7660D | 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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 2 October 2012 | 6 May 2003 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 1 |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 60 Watt |
A10-5800K has an age advantage of 9 years, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 306.3% more advanced lithography process.
Athlon MP 2800+, on the other hand, has 66.7% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between A10-5800K and Athlon MP 2800+. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that A10-5800K is a desktop processor while Athlon MP 2800+ is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between A10-5800K and Athlon MP 2800+, 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.
