Phenom X3 8750 vs A4-6320
Aggregate performance score
A4-6320 outperforms Phenom X3 8750 by a small 5% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A4-6320 and Phenom X3 8750 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2485 | 2524 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | 1.40 | 0.91 |
| Architecture codename | Richland (2013−2014) | Toliman (2008) |
| Release date | December 2013 (10 years ago) | April 2008 (16 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
A4-6320 and Phenom X3 8750 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) | 3 (Tri-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 3 |
| Base clock speed | 3.8 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 4 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| L1 cache | 96 KB | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1024 KB | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 2 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | 285 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 70 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 70 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,303 million | 450 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on A4-6320 and Phenom X3 8750 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 | FM2 | AM2+ |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A4-6320 and Phenom X3 8750. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | - |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| PowerGating | + | - |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A4-6320 and Phenom X3 8750 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
| IOMMU 2.0 | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A4-6320 and Phenom X3 8750. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3-1600 | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon™ HD 8370D | no data |
| Number of pipelines | 128 | no data |
| Enduro | + | - |
| Switchable graphics | + | - |
| UVD | + | - |
| VCE | + | - |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of A4-6320 and Phenom X3 8750 integrated GPUs.
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by A4-6320 and Phenom X3 8750 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | DirectX® 11 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A4-6320 and Phenom X3 8750.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | no data |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.96 | 0.91 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 3 |
| Threads | 2 | 3 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 95 Watt |
A4-6320 has a 5.5% higher aggregate performance score, a 103.1% more advanced lithography process, and 46.2% lower power consumption.
Phenom X3 8750, on the other hand, has 50% more physical cores and 50% more threads.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A4-6320 and Phenom X3 8750.
Should you still have questions on choice between A4-6320 and Phenom X3 8750, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
