Athlon II X2 260 vs A4-3300M
Aggregate performance score
Athlon II X2 260 outperforms A4-3300M by a small 6% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2916 | 2879 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 3.72 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD A-Series | no data |
| Power efficiency | 0.81 | 0.46 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Architecture codename | Llano (2011−2012) | Regor (2009−2013) |
| Release date | 14 June 2011 (14 years ago) | 11 May 2010 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $48 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
A4-3300M and Athlon II X2 260 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 1.9 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 228 mm2 | 117 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 410 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on A4-3300M and Athlon II X2 260 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 | 1 |
| Socket | FS1 | AM3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A4-3300M and Athlon II X2 260. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6480G | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A4-3300M and Athlon II X2 260 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A4-3300M and Athlon II X2 260. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon HD 6480G (444 MHz) | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A4-3300M and Athlon II X2 260.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.67 | 0.71 |
| Recency | 14 June 2011 | 11 May 2010 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 65 Watt |
A4-3300M has an age advantage of 1 year, a 40.6% more advanced lithography process, and 85.7% lower power consumption.
Athlon II X2 260, on the other hand, has a 6% higher aggregate performance score.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between AMD A4-3300M and AMD Athlon II X2 260.
Be aware that A4-3300M is a notebook processor while Athlon II X2 260 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
