E-450 vs A10-8700P

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing A10-8700P and E-450 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking2099not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD CarrizoAMD E-Series
Architecture codenameCarrizo (2015−2018)Zacate (2011−2013)
Release date3 June 2015 (9 years ago)22 August 2011 (12 years ago)
Current price$466 $125

Detailed specifications

A10-8700P and E-450 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed1.8 GHzno data
Boost clock speed3.2 GHz1.65 GHz
L1 cacheno data64K (per core)
L2 cache2048 KB512K (per core)
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography28 nm40 nm
Die sizeno data75 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Number of transistors3100 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on A10-8700P and E-450 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
SocketFP4FT1 BGA 413-Ball
Power consumption (TDP)12 - 35 Watt18 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A10-8700P and E-450. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsHSA 1.0MMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-V
AES-NI1no data
FMAFMA4no data
AVXAVXno data
FRTC1no data
FreeSync1no data
PowerTune-no data
DualGraphics1no data
TrueAudio+no data
PowerNow+no data
PowerGating+no data
Out-of-band client management+no data
VirusProtect+no data
HSA+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A10-8700P and E-450 are enumerated here.

AMD-V1+
IOMMU 2.0+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-8700P and E-450. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-2133DDR3 Single-channel
Max memory channels2no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R6 GraphicsAMD Radeon HD 6320
iGPU core count6no data
Enduro+no data
Switchable graphics1no data
UVD+no data
VCE+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A10-8700P and E-450 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+no data
HDMI+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A10-8700P and E-450 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan1no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A10-8700P and E-450.

PCIe version3.0no 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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

A10-8700P 2237
+192%
E-450 765

A10-8700P outperforms E-450 by 192% 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 496
+355%
E-450 109

A10-8700P outperforms E-450 by 355% 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 1099
+524%
E-450 176

A10-8700P outperforms E-450 by 524% 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
+120%
E-450 1063

A10-8700P outperforms E-450 by 120% 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
+216%
E-450 2021

A10-8700P outperforms E-450 by 216% 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%

A10-8700P 2978
+188%
E-450 1035

A10-8700P outperforms E-450 by 188% 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%

A10-8700P 17.19
+275%
E-450 64.5

E-450 outperforms A10-8700P by 275% 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%

A10-8700P 2
+277%
E-450 1

A10-8700P outperforms E-450 by 277% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-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
+169%
E-450 0.32

A10-8700P outperforms E-450 by 169% 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
+1567%
E-450 0.1

A10-8700P outperforms E-450 by 1567% 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
+172%
E-450 489

A10-8700P outperforms E-450 by 172% in WinRAR 4.0.

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
+424%
E-450 3

A10-8700P outperforms E-450 by 424% in x264 encoding pass 2.

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
+355%
E-450 16

A10-8700P outperforms E-450 by 355% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Pros & cons summary


Recency 3 June 2015 22 August 2011
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 28 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 18 Watt

We couldn't decide between A10-8700P and E-450. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between A10-8700P and E-450, 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 E-450
E-450

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.


3.2 114 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 467 votes

Rate E-450 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A10-8700P or E-450, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.