FX-7500 vs A4-4000

VS

Aggregate performance score

A4-4000
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.72
FX-7500
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 19 Watt
2.02
+181%

FX-7500 outperforms A4-4000 by a whopping 181% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A4-4000 and FX-7500 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26841910
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD Kaveri
Power efficiency1.0510.06
Architecture codenameRichland (2013−2014)Kaveri (2014−2015)
Release date1 June 2013 (11 years ago)4 June 2014 (10 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A4-4000 and FX-7500 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed3 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost clock speed3.2 GHz3.3 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache1 MB (per core)4096 KB
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography32 nm28 nm
Die size246 mm2245 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)70 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,178 million2,410 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A4-4000 and FX-7500 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
SocketFM2FP3
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt19 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A4-4000 and FX-7500. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno data86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, FMA
AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+
FRTC-+
TrueAudio-+
PowerNow-+
PowerGating-+
Out-of-band client management-+
VirusProtect-+
HSA-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A4-4000 and FX-7500 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A4-4000 and FX-7500. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3-1600
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 7480DAMD Radeon R7 Graphics
iGPU core countno data6
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A4-4000 and FX-7500 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A4-4000 and FX-7500 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A4-4000 and FX-7500.

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.

A4-4000 0.72
FX-7500 2.02
+181%

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.

A4-4000 1146
FX-7500 3209
+180%

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.

A4-4000 330
+4.8%
FX-7500 315

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.

A4-4000 464
FX-7500 684
+47.4%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.72 2.02
Recency 1 June 2013 4 June 2014
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 19 Watt

FX-7500 has a 180.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 242.1% lower power consumption.

The FX-7500 is our recommended choice as it beats the A4-4000 in performance tests.

Note that A4-4000 is a desktop processor while FX-7500 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A4-4000 and FX-7500, 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 A4-4000
A4-4000
AMD FX-7500
FX-7500

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.


3.1 358 votes

Rate A4-4000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 91 vote

Rate FX-7500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A4-4000 or FX-7500, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.