Athlon 64 3400+ vs A6-3400M
Primary details
Comparing A6-3400M and Athlon 64 3400+ processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2617 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD A-Series | no data |
| Architecture codename | Llano (2011−2012) | Clawhammer (2001−2005) |
| Release date | 15 June 2011 (13 years ago) | January 2001 (23 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
A6-3400M and Athlon 64 3400+ 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 1.4 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2.3 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 4 MB | 512K |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 130 nm |
| Die size | 218 mm2 | 193 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 1000 Million | 105 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on A6-3400M and Athlon 64 3400+ 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 | FS1 | 754 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 89 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-3400M and Athlon 64 3400+. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6480G | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-3400M and Athlon 64 3400+ are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-3400M and Athlon 64 3400+. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon HD 6520G | 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.
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
| Physical cores | 4 | 1 |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 89 Watt |
A6-3400M has 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 306.3% more advanced lithography process, and 154.3% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between A6-3400M and Athlon 64 3400+. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that A6-3400M is a notebook processor while Athlon 64 3400+ is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between A6-3400M and Athlon 64 3400+, 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.
