A6-9500E vs A4-3300M

VS

Aggregate performance score

A4-3300M
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.75
A6-9500E
2017
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
1.11
+48%

A6-9500E outperforms A4-3300M by a considerable 48% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A4-3300M and A6-9500E processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26552398
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD A-Seriesno data
Power efficiency2.033.00
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date14 June 2011 (13 years ago)27 July 2017 (7 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A4-3300M and A6-9500E 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speed1.9 GHz3 GHz
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz3.4 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache1 MB (per core)1024 KB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm28 nm
Die size228 mm2246 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data74 °C
Number of transistors1,178 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A4-3300M and A6-9500E 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 configuration11
SocketFS1AM4
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A4-3300M and A6-9500E. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6480Gno data
AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+
FRTC-+
FreeSync-+
PowerTune-+
TrueAudio-+
PowerNow-+
PowerGating-+
VirusProtect-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A4-3300M and A6-9500E are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A4-3300M and A6-9500E. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4-2400
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 6480GAMD Radeon R5 Graphics
iGPU core countno data4
Enduro-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A4-3300M and A6-9500E integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A4-3300M and A6-9500E integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A4-3300M and A6-9500E.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data8

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.

A4-3300M 0.75
A6-9500E 1.11
+48%

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.

A4-3300M 1186
A6-9500E 1756
+48.1%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.75 1.11
Recency 14 June 2011 27 July 2017
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm

A6-9500E has a 48% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.

The A6-9500E is our recommended choice as it beats the A4-3300M in performance tests.

Be aware that A4-3300M is a notebook processor while A6-9500E is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A4-3300M and A6-9500E, 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 A4-3300M
A4-3300M
AMD A6-9500E
A6-9500E

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.


3.1 110 votes

Rate A4-3300M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 48 votes

Rate A6-9500E on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A4-3300M or A6-9500E, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.