E2-3000 vs A6-3620

VS

Aggregate performance score

A6-3620
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
1.17
+154%
E2-3000
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.46

A6-3620 outperforms E2-3000 by a whopping 154% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A6-3620 and E2-3000 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking23732941
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD E-Series
Power efficiency1.702.90
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Kabini (2013−2014)
Release date20 December 2011 (13 years ago)23 May 2013 (11 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A6-3620 and E2-3000 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 speed2.2 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz1.65 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache1 MB (per core)1024 KB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm28 nm
Die size228 mm2246 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data90 °C
Number of transistors1,178 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A6-3620 and E2-3000 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
SocketFM1FT3
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-3620 and E2-3000. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno data86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX
AES-NI-+
FMA-FMA4
AVX-+
PowerNow-+
PowerGating-+
VirusProtect-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-3620 and E2-3000 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-3620 and E2-3000. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardRadeon HD 6530DAMD Radeon HD 8280
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A6-3620 and E2-3000 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A6-3620 and E2-3000 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A6-3620 and E2-3000.

PCIe versionno data2.0

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.

A6-3620 1.17
+154%
E2-3000 0.46

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.

A6-3620 1864
+157%
E2-3000 726

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.17 0.46
Recency 20 December 2011 23 May 2013
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 15 Watt

A6-3620 has a 154.3% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

E2-3000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 333.3% lower power consumption.

The A6-3620 is our recommended choice as it beats the E2-3000 in performance tests.

Note that A6-3620 is a desktop processor while E2-3000 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A6-3620 and E2-3000, 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 A6-3620
A6-3620
AMD E2-3000
E2-3000

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.


3.4 69 votes

Rate A6-3620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 26 votes

Rate E2-3000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A6-3620 or E2-3000, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.