E-450 vs A6-3400M
Primary details
Comparing A6-3400M and E-450 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2522 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD A-Series | AMD E-Series |
| Architecture codename | Llano (2011−2012) | Zacate (2011−2013) |
| Release date | 14 June 2011 (12 years ago) | 22 August 2011 (12 years ago) |
| Current price | $70 | $125 |
Detailed specifications
A6-3400M and E-450 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 | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2.3 GHz | 1.65 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 40 nm |
| Die size | 228 mm2 | 75 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on A6-3400M and E-450 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 | FT1 BGA 413-Ball |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 18 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-3400M and E-450. 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 | MMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-V |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-3400M and E-450 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-3400M and E-450. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 Single-channel |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon HD 6520G | AMD Radeon HD 6320 |
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
A6-3400M outperforms E-450 by 56% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
A6-3400M outperforms E-450 by 94% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
A6-3400M outperforms E-450 by 210% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 20%
A6-3400M outperforms E-450 by 42% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
A6-3400M outperforms E-450 by 144% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.
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 E-450 by 106% in 3DMark06 CPU.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 18%
E-450 outperforms A6-3400M by 148% in wPrime 32.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 17%
A6-3400M outperforms E-450 by 187% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.
Pros & cons summary
| Integrated graphics card | 0.77 | |
| Recency | 14 June 2011 | 22 August 2011 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 18 Watt |
We couldn't decide between A6-3400M and E-450. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between A6-3400M and E-450, 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.
