A6-5200 vs A10-8700P

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A10-8700P
2015
4 cores / 4 threads, 12 Watt
1.41
+34.3%
A6-5200
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 25 Watt
1.05

A10-8700P outperforms A6-5200 by a substantial 34% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A10-8700P and A6-5200 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22152439
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD CarrizoAMD A-Series
Power efficiency3.813.97
Architecture codenameCarrizo (2015−2018)Kabini (2013−2014)
Release date3 June 2015 (9 years ago)23 May 2013 (11 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A10-8700P and A6-5200 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 speed1.8 GHzno data
Boost clock speed3.2 GHz2 GHz
L1 cacheno data256 KB
L2 cache2048 KB2048 KB
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography28 nm28 nm
Die sizeno data246 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °C90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data90 °C
Number of transistors3100 Million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A10-8700P and A6-5200 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 configurationno data1
SocketFP4FT3
Power consumption (TDP)12 - 35 Watt25 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A10-8700P and A6-5200. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsHSA 1.086x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX
AES-NI++
FMAFMA4FMA4
AVXAVX+
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-
DualGraphics+-
TrueAudio+-
PowerNow++
PowerGating++
Out-of-band client management+-
VirusProtect++
HSA+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A10-8700P and A6-5200 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-8700P and A6-5200. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-2133DDR3-1600
Max memory channels21

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R6 GraphicsAMD Radeon HD 8400
iGPU core count6no data
จำนวนพาธไลน์no data128
Enduro++
Switchable graphics++
UVD++
VCE++

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A10-8700P and A6-5200 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort++
HDMI++

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A10-8700P and A6-5200 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12DirectX® 11
Vulkan++

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A10-8700P and A6-5200.

PCIe version3.02.0

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.

A10-8700P 1.41
+34.3%
A6-5200 1.05

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.

A10-8700P 2245
+35%
A6-5200 1663

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.

A10-8700P 506
+143%
A6-5200 208

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.

A10-8700P 1126
+91.5%
A6-5200 588

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.

A10-8700P 2334
+46.1%
A6-5200 1598

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.

A10-8700P 6394
+14.2%
A6-5200 5600

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.

A10-8700P 2978
+12%
A6-5200 2660

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.

A10-8700P 17.19
+51.8%
A6-5200 26.1

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.

A10-8700P 2
+23.2%
A6-5200 2

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

A10-8700P 194
+24.4%
A6-5200 156

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.

A10-8700P 69
+62.7%
A6-5200 42

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.

A10-8700P 0.86
+65.4%
A6-5200 0.52

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.

A10-8700P 1.5
+42.9%
A6-5200 1.1

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.

A10-8700P 1328
+15.3%
A6-5200 1152

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.  

A10-8700P 15
+32.9%
A6-5200 11

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.  

A10-8700P 74
+42.5%
A6-5200 52

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

A10-8700P 4677
+29.7%
A6-5200 3607

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

A10-8700P 1975
+78.5%
A6-5200 1107

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.41 1.05
Recency 3 June 2015 23 May 2013
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 25 Watt

A10-8700P has a 34.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and 108.3% lower power consumption.

The A10-8700P is our recommended choice as it beats the A6-5200 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A10-8700P and A6-5200, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

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


AMD A10-8700P
A10-8700P
AMD A6-5200
A6-5200

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.

Community ratings

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


3.2 119 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 211 votes

Rate A6-5200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A10-8700P or A6-5200, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.