E2-3800 vs A6-4400M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A6-4400M
2012
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.65

E2-3800 outperforms A6-4400M by a moderate 14% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A6-4400M and E2-3800 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking26512574
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-SeriesAMD A-Series
Architecture codenameTrinity (2012−2013)Kabini (2013−2014)
Release date15 May 2012 (12 years ago)23 May 2013 (11 years ago)
Current price$95 $107

Detailed specifications

A6-4400M and E2-3800 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 cores2 (Dual-core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed2.7 GHzno data
Boost clock speed3.2 GHz1.3 GHz
L1 cache96 KB128 KB
L2 cache1 MB (shared)2048 KB
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography32 nm28 nm
Die size246 mm2107 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data90 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data90 °C
Number of transistors1,178 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on A6-4400M and E2-3800 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
SocketFS1r2FT3
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-4400M and E2-3800. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, FMA86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, DDR3L-1600
AES-NI++
FMA+FMA4
AVX++
PowerTuneno data-
TrueAudiono data-
PowerNowno data+
PowerGatingno data+
Out-of-band client managementno data-
VirusProtectno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-4400M and E2-3800 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0no data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-4400M and E2-3800. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesunknownDDR3-1600
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 7520GAMD Radeon HD 8280
Number of pipelinesno data128
Endurono data+
Switchable graphicsno data1
UVDno data+
VCEno data+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A6-4400M and E2-3800 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPortno data+
HDMIno data+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A6-4400M and E2-3800 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkanno data1

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A6-4400M and E2-3800.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data4

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.

A6-4400M 0.65
E2-3800 0.74
+13.8%

E2-3800 outperforms A6-4400M by 14% based on our aggregate benchmark results.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

A6-4400M 1010
E2-3800 1148
+13.7%

E2-3800 outperforms A6-4400M by 14% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

A6-4400M 313
+127%
E2-3800 138

A6-4400M outperforms E2-3800 by 127% in GeekBench 5 Single-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.

Benchmark coverage: 42%

A6-4400M 400
+1.3%
E2-3800 395

A6-4400M outperforms E2-3800 by 1% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

A6-4400M 2292
E2-3800 2295
+0.1%

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.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

A6-4400M 3407
E2-3800 3575
+4.9%

E2-3800 outperforms A6-4400M by 5% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

A6-4400M 46.82
E2-3800 42.64
+9.8%

A6-4400M outperforms E2-3800 by 10% in wPrime 32.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

A6-4400M 1
E2-3800 1
+13.3%

E2-3800 outperforms A6-4400M by 13% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

A6-4400M 0.8
+150%
E2-3800 0.32

A6-4400M outperforms E2-3800 by 150% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A6-4400M 0.7
E2-3800 0.8
+19.7%

E2-3800 outperforms A6-4400M by 20% in TrueCrypt AES.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A6-4400M 1353
+40.5%
E2-3800 963

A6-4400M outperforms E2-3800 by 40% in WinRAR 4.0.

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.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A6-4400M 8
+1.2%
E2-3800 8

A6-4400M outperforms E2-3800 by 1% in x264 encoding pass 2.

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.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A6-4400M 39
+8.4%
E2-3800 36

A6-4400M outperforms E2-3800 by 8% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.65 0.74
Integrated graphics card 0.82 0.67
Recency 15 May 2012 23 May 2013
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 15 Watt

The E2-3800 is our recommended choice as it beats the A6-4400M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A6-4400M and E2-3800, 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 A6-4400M
A6-4400M
AMD E2-3800
E2-3800

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.


3.3 173 votes

Rate A6-4400M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 70 votes

Rate E2-3800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A6-4400M or E2-3800, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.