Core 2 Extreme X7800 vs A6-3400M
Aggregate performance score
A6-3400M outperforms Core 2 Extreme X7800 by a minimal 4% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A6-3400M and Core 2 Extreme X7800 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2544 | 2581 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD A-Series | Intel Core 2 Extreme |
| Architecture codename | Llano (2011−2012) | Merom XE (2007) |
| Release date | 14 June 2011 (13 years ago) | 17 July 2007 (16 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $851 |
| Current price | $70 | $299 (0.4x MSRP) |
Detailed specifications
A6-3400M and Core 2 Extreme X7800 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 1.4 GHz | 2.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.3 GHz | 2.6 GHz |
| Bus support | no data | 800 MHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 4 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 4 MB L2 Cache |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | 228 mm2 | 143 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 291 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
| VID voltage range | no data | 1.1V-1.375V |
Compatibility
Information on A6-3400M and Core 2 Extreme X7800 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 | no data |
| Socket | FS1 | PPGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 44 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-3400M and Core 2 Extreme X7800. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6480G, DDR3(L)-1333 Memory Controller | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| FSB parity | no data | - |
| Status | no data | Discontinued |
Security technologies
A6-3400M and Core 2 Extreme X7800 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-3400M and Core 2 Extreme X7800 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | no data |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-3400M and Core 2 Extreme X7800. 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.
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.
A6-3400M outperforms Core 2 Extreme X7800 by 4% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
A6-3400M outperforms Core 2 Extreme X7800 by 5% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
A6-3400M outperforms Core 2 Extreme X7800 by 3% in 3DMark06 CPU.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.77 | 0.74 |
| Recency | 14 June 2011 | 17 July 2007 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 44 Watt |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A6-3400M and Core 2 Extreme X7800.
Should you still have questions on choice between A6-3400M and Core 2 Extreme X7800, 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.
