Xeon X3470 vs A6-3400M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A6-3400M
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
0.75
Xeon X3470
2009
4 cores / 8 threads, 95 Watt
2.06
+175%

Xeon X3470 outperforms A6-3400M by a whopping 175% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A6-3400M and Xeon X3470 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26531893
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopServer
SeriesAMD A-Seriesno data
Power efficiency2.032.05
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)no data
Release date14 June 2011 (13 years ago)1 July 2009 (15 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A6-3400M and Xeon X3470 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads48
Base clock speed1.4 GHz2.93 GHz
Boost clock speed2.3 GHz3.6 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache1 MB (per core)no data
L3 cache0 KB8 MB Intel® Smart Cache
Chip lithography32 nm45 nm
Die size228 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data73 °C
Number of transistors1,178 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A6-3400M and Xeon X3470 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
SocketFS1FCLGA1156,LGA1156
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-3400M and Xeon X3470. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6480GIntel® SSE4.2
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data1.0
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
Idle Statesno data+
Demand Based Switchingno data+
PAEno data36 Bit

Security technologies

A6-3400M and Xeon X3470 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-3400M and Xeon X3470 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 Xeon X3470. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3-800, DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data21 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon HD 6520Gno data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A6-3400M and Xeon X3470.

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
Xeon X3470 2.06
+175%

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 1191
Xeon X3470 3269
+174%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.75 2.06
Recency 14 June 2011 1 July 2009
Threads 4 8
Chip lithography 32 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 95 Watt

A6-3400M has an age advantage of 1 year, a 40.6% more advanced lithography process, and 171.4% lower power consumption.

Xeon X3470, on the other hand, has a 174.7% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more threads.

The Xeon X3470 is our recommended choice as it beats the A6-3400M in performance tests.

Be aware that A6-3400M is a notebook processor while Xeon X3470 is a server/workstation one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A6-3400M and Xeon X3470, 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 Xeon X3470
Xeon X3470

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
4.3 740 votes

Rate Xeon X3470 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A6-3400M or Xeon X3470, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.