A6-7310 vs A10-8700P

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

A10-8700P
2015
4 cores / 4 threads
1.44
A6-7310
2015
4 cores / 4 threads
1.74
+20.8%

A6-7310 outperforms A10-8700P by 21% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary Details

Comparing A10-8700P and A6-7310 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking20721912
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD CarrizoAMD A-Series
Architecture codenameCarrizo (2015−2018)Carrizo-L (2015)
Release date3 June 2015 (8 years ago)7 May 2015 (8 years ago)
Current price$466 $452

Detailed Specifications

A10-8700P and A6-7310 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 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.2 GHz2.4 GHz
L2 cache2048 KB2048 KB
Chip lithography28 nm28 nm
Maximum core temperature90 °C90 °C
Number of transistors3100 Million930 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on A10-8700P and A6-7310 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.

SocketFP4FP4
Power consumption (TDP)12 - 35 Watt12-25 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A10-8700P and A6-7310. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsHSA 1.0MMX, SSE4.2, AES, AVX, BMI1, F16C, AMD64, VT
AES-NI1+
FMAFMA4FMA4
AVXAVX+
FRTC1no data
FreeSync1no data
PowerTune--
DualGraphics1no data
TrueAudio+-
PowerNow++
PowerGating++
Out-of-band client management+-
VirusProtect++
HSA+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A10-8700P and A6-7310 are enumerated here.

AMD-V11
IOMMU 2.0++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-8700P and A6-7310. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-2133DDR3L-1866
Max memory channels21

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R6 GraphicsAMD Radeon R4 Graphics
iGPU core count6no data
Enduro++
Switchable graphics11
UVD++
VCE++

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A10-8700P and A6-7310 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort++
HDMI++

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A10-8700P and A6-7310 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12DirectX® 12
Vulkan11

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A10-8700P and A6-7310.

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 1.44
A6-7310 1.74
+20.8%

A6-7310 outperforms A10-8700P by 21% 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%

A10-8700P 2231
A6-7310 2689
+20.5%

A6-7310 outperforms A10-8700P by 21% 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%

A10-8700P 491
+114%
A6-7310 229

A10-8700P outperforms A6-7310 by 114% 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%

A10-8700P 1086
+80.1%
A6-7310 603

A10-8700P outperforms A6-7310 by 80% 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%

A10-8700P 2334
+29.6%
A6-7310 1801

A10-8700P outperforms A6-7310 by 30% 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%

A10-8700P 6394
+26%
A6-7310 5075

A10-8700P outperforms A6-7310 by 26% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

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%

A10-8700P 2
+17.6%
A6-7310 2

A10-8700P outperforms A6-7310 by 18% 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%

A10-8700P 194
+39.6%
A6-7310 139

A10-8700P outperforms A6-7310 by 40% 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%

A10-8700P 69
+55.1%
A6-7310 45

A10-8700P outperforms A6-7310 by 55% 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%

A10-8700P 0.86
+48.3%
A6-7310 0.58

A10-8700P outperforms A6-7310 by 48% 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%

A10-8700P 1.5
+50%
A6-7310 1

A10-8700P outperforms A6-7310 by 50% 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%

A10-8700P 1328
+12.9%
A6-7310 1176

A10-8700P outperforms A6-7310 by 13% 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%

A10-8700P 74
+38.7%
A6-7310 53

A10-8700P outperforms A6-7310 by 39% 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%

A10-8700P 15
+30.6%
A6-7310 12

A10-8700P outperforms A6-7310 by 31% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Gaming performance

Pros & Cons Summary


Performance score 1.44 1.74

The A6-7310 is our recommended choice as it beats the A10-8700P in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A10-8700P and A6-7310, 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 A6-7310
A6-7310

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.


3.2 109 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 455 votes

Rate A6-7310 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & Сomments

Here you can ask a question about A10-8700P or A6-7310, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.