A8-7410 vs A4-5300

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A4-5300
2012
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.89

A8-7410 outperforms A4-5300 by a whopping 101% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A4-5300 and A8-7410 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25542027
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesAMD A-Series (Desktop)AMD A-Series
Power efficiency1.256.53
Architecture codenameTrinity (2012−2013)Carrizo-L (2015)
Release date2 October 2012 (12 years ago)7 May 2015 (9 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A4-5300 and A8-7410 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 speed3.4 GHz2.2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.6 GHz2.5 GHz
L1 cache128K (per core)no data
L2 cache1 MB (per core)2048 KB
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography32 nm28 nm
Die size246 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)70 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,178 million930 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A4-5300 and A8-7410 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
SocketFM2FP4
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt12 - 25 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A4-5300 and A8-7410. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX (+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A, AES, AVX, XOP, FMA3, FMA4MMX, SSE4.2, AES, AVX, BMI1, F16C, AMD64, VT, AMD-V
AES-NI++
FMA+FMA4
AVX++
PowerNow-+
PowerGating-+
VirusProtect-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A4-5300 and A8-7410 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A4-5300 and A8-7410. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3L-1866
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 7480DAMD Radeon R5 Graphics
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A4-5300 and A8-7410 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A4-5300 and A8-7410 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A4-5300 and A8-7410.

PCIe versionno data2.0

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.

A4-5300 0.89
A8-7410 1.79
+101%

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.

A4-5300 1357
A8-7410 2741
+102%

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.

A4-5300 369
+51.9%
A8-7410 243

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.

A4-5300 504
A8-7410 633
+25.6%

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.

A4-5300 2734
+42.6%
A8-7410 1917

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.

A4-5300 4345
A8-7410 4665
+7.4%

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.

A4-5300 2284
A8-7410 2936
+28.5%

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.

A4-5300 35.5
A8-7410 27
+31.5%

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.

A4-5300 1
A8-7410 2
+29%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

A4-5300 107
A8-7410 174
+62.6%

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made 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 (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

A4-5300 67
+28.8%
A8-7410 52

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.

A4-5300 0.91
+49.2%
A8-7410 0.61

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.

A4-5300 0.8
A8-7410 1
+15.9%

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.  

A4-5300 10
A8-7410 10
+0.7%

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.  

A4-5300 50
+9.8%
A8-7410 46

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.

A4-5300 1347
+4.3%
A8-7410 1292

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.89 1.79
Recency 2 October 2012 7 May 2015
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 12 Watt

A8-7410 has a 101.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 441.7% lower power consumption.

The A8-7410 is our recommended choice as it beats the A4-5300 in performance tests.

Note that A4-5300 is a desktop processor while A8-7410 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A4-5300 and A8-7410, 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 A4-5300
A4-5300
AMD A8-7410
A8-7410

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.


3.4 222 votes

Rate A4-5300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 693 votes

Rate A8-7410 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A4-5300 or A8-7410, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.