Athlon II X2 215 vs A4-6300

Aggregate performance score

A4-6300
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.90
+47.5%
Athlon II X2 215
2009
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.61

A4-6300 outperforms Athlon II X2 215 by a considerable 48% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A4-6300 and Athlon II X2 215 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25332781
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data8.66
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.300.88
Architecture codenameRichland (2013−2014)Regor (2009−2013)
Release date1 June 2013 (11 years ago)20 October 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$45

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

A4-6300 and Athlon II X2 215 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 speed3.7 GHz2.7 GHz
Boost clock speed3.9 GHz2.7 GHz
L1 cache96 KB128 KB
L2 cache1024 KB512 KB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm45 nm
Die size246 mm2117 mm2
Maximum core temperature70 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)70 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,178 million410 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A4-6300 and Athlon II X2 215 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
SocketFM2AM3
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A4-6300 and Athlon II X2 215. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
FMAFMA4-
AVXAVX-
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
VirusProtect+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A4-6300 and Athlon II X2 215 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
IOMMU 2.0+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A4-6300 and Athlon II X2 215. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1600DDR3
Max memory channels2no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon™ HD 8370DOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)
Number of pipelines128no data
Enduro+-
Switchable graphics+-
UVD+-
VCE+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A4-6300 and Athlon II X2 215 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A4-6300 and Athlon II X2 215 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 11no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A4-6300 and Athlon II X2 215.

PCIe version2.02.0

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.

A4-6300 0.90
+47.5%
Athlon II X2 215 0.61

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.

A4-6300 1426
+46.6%
Athlon II X2 215 973

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.

A4-6300 394
+44.3%
Athlon II X2 215 273

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.

A4-6300 561
+18.6%
Athlon II X2 215 473

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.90 0.61
Recency 1 June 2013 20 October 2009
Chip lithography 32 nm 45 nm

A4-6300 has a 47.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, and a 40.6% more advanced lithography process.

The A4-6300 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon II X2 215 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A4-6300 and Athlon II X2 215, 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 A4-6300
A4-6300
AMD Athlon II X2 215
Athlon II X2 215

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.


3.1 281 vote

Rate A4-6300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 267 votes

Rate Athlon II X2 215 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A4-6300 or Athlon II X2 215, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.