Athlon Silver 3050U vs A4-3400

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A4-3400
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.70
Athlon Silver 3050U
2020
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
1.94
+177%

Athlon Silver 3050U outperforms A4-3400 by a whopping 177% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A4-3400 and Athlon Silver 3050U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking26661919
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD Picasso (Ryzen 3000 APU)
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Dali (Zen) (2020)
Release date7 September 2011 (12 years ago)6 January 2020 (4 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A4-3400 and Athlon Silver 3050U 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 speed2.7 GHz2.3 GHz
Boost clock speed2.7 GHz3.2 GHz
Multiplierno data23
L1 cache128 KB (per core)192 KB
L2 cache512 KB (per core)1 MB
L3 cache0 KB4 MB
Chip lithography32 nm14 nm
Die size228 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data95 °C
Number of transistors1,178 million4500 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on A4-3400 and Athlon Silver 3050U 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 configuration1no data
SocketFM1FP5
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A4-3400 and Athlon Silver 3050U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A4-3400 and Athlon Silver 3050U are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A4-3400 and Athlon Silver 3050U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data38.397 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardRadeon HD 6410DAMD Radeon RX Vega 2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A4-3400 and Athlon Silver 3050U.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data12

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.

A4-3400 0.70
Athlon Silver 3050U 1.94
+177%

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.

A4-3400 1081
Athlon Silver 3050U 2993
+177%

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.

A4-3400 291
Athlon Silver 3050U 771
+165%

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.

A4-3400 505
Athlon Silver 3050U 1339
+165%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.70 1.94
Recency 7 September 2011 6 January 2020
Chip lithography 32 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 15 Watt

Athlon Silver 3050U has a 177.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 333.3% lower power consumption.

The Athlon Silver 3050U is our recommended choice as it beats the A4-3400 in performance tests.

Note that A4-3400 is a desktop processor while Athlon Silver 3050U is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A4-3400 and Athlon Silver 3050U, 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 A4-3400
A4-3400
AMD Athlon Silver 3050U
Athlon Silver 3050U

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.


2.9 80 votes

Rate A4-3400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2 7964 votes

Rate Athlon Silver 3050U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A4-3400 or Athlon Silver 3050U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.