Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ vs A6-3650
Aggregate performance score
A6-3650 outperforms Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ by a whopping 495% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A6-3650 and Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2276 | 3194 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Mobile Athlon 64 |
| Power efficiency | 1.24 | 0.26 |
| Architecture codename | Llano (2011−2012) | Clawhammer (2001−2005) |
| Release date | 30 June 2011 (13 years ago) | August 2005 (19 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
A6-3650 and Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 2.6 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 800 MHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 128K |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | no data |
| Die size | 228 mm2 | 193 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 106 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on A6-3650 and Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ 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 | FM1 | 754 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 81 Watt |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-3650 and Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-3650 and Mobile Athlon 64 3700+. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR1 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Radeon HD 6530D | no data |
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.31 | 0.22 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 1 |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 81 Watt |
A6-3650 has a 495.5% higher aggregate performance score, and 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads.
Mobile Athlon 64 3700+, on the other hand, has 23.5% lower power consumption.
The A6-3650 is our recommended choice as it beats the Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ in performance tests.
Note that A6-3650 is a desktop processor while Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between A6-3650 and Mobile Athlon 64 3700+, 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.
