Pentium A1018 vs A6-3400M

VS

Aggregate performance score

A6-3400M
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
0.75
Pentium A1018
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.76
+1.3%

Pentium A1018 outperforms A6-3400M by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A6-3400M and Pentium A1018 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26672657
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-Seriesno data
Power efficiency2.032.06
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)no data
Release date14 June 2011 (13 years ago)1 July 2013 (11 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A6-3400M and Pentium A1018 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed1.4 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost clock speed2.3 GHzno data
Bus rateno data5 GT/s
L1 cache128 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache1 MB (per core)no data
L3 cache0 KB1 MB Intel® Smart Cache
Chip lithography32 nm22 nm
Die size228 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Number of transistors1,178 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A6-3400M and Pentium A1018 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
SocketFS1FCPGA988
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-3400M and Pentium A1018. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6480GIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
My WiFino data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+

Security technologies

A6-3400M and Pentium A1018 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-3400M and Pentium A1018 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-3400M and Pentium A1018. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3/L/-RS 1333/1600
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data25.6 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 6520G (400 MHz)Intel HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel Processors
Graphics max frequencyno data1 GHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A6-3400M and Pentium A1018 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
SDVOno data+
CRTno data+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A6-3400M and Pentium A1018.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

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 0.75
Pentium A1018 0.76
+1.3%

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.

A6-3400M 1193
Pentium A1018 1210
+1.4%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.75 0.76
Integrated graphics card 0.78 0.77
Recency 14 June 2011 1 July 2013
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 22 nm

A6-3400M has 1.3% faster integrated GPU, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Pentium A1018, on the other hand, has a 1.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 45.5% more advanced lithography process.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A6-3400M and Pentium A1018.


Should you still have questions on choice between A6-3400M and Pentium A1018, 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 A6-3400M
A6-3400M
Intel Pentium A1018
Pentium A1018

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.


3.6 172 votes

Rate A6-3400M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 16 votes

Rate Pentium A1018 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A6-3400M or Pentium A1018, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.