Pentium N3540 vs A6-3420M
Aggregate performance score
A6-3420M outperforms Pentium N3540 by a small 7% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A6-3420M and Pentium N3540 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2606 | 2660 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD A-Series | Intel Pentium |
| Power efficiency | 2.19 | 9.60 |
| Architecture codename | Llano (2011−2012) | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) |
| Release date | 20 December 2011 (13 years ago) | 22 May 2014 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $251 |
Detailed specifications
A6-3420M and Pentium N3540 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) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 1.5 GHz | 2.16 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 2.66 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 224 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 2 MB L2 Cache |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | 228 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on A6-3420M and Pentium N3540 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 | FCBGA1170 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 7.5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-3420M and Pentium N3540. 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 |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Smart Connect | no data | + |
Security technologies
A6-3420M and Pentium N3540 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-3420M and Pentium N3540 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | - |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-3420M and Pentium N3540. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3L-1333 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 21.32 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 Intel Atom Processor Z3700 Series |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 896 MHz |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of A6-3420M and Pentium N3540 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 2 |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by A6-3420M and Pentium N3540 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 11.2 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A6-3420M and Pentium N3540.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 4 |
| USB revision | no data | 3.0 and 2.0 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 2 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 5 |
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
TrueCrypt AES
TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.
WinRAR 4.0
WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.
x264 encoding pass 2
x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.
x264 encoding pass 1
x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.81 | 0.76 |
| Integrated graphics card | 0.78 | 0.77 |
| Recency | 20 December 2011 | 22 May 2014 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 7 Watt |
A6-3420M has a 6.6% higher aggregate performance score, and 1.3% faster integrated GPU.
Pentium N3540, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 45.5% more advanced lithography process, and 400% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A6-3420M and Pentium N3540.
Should you still have questions on choice between A6-3420M and Pentium N3540, 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.
