3020e vs A6-5200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A6-5200
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 25 Watt
1.07

3020e outperforms A6-5200 by a considerable 48% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A6-5200 and 3020e processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking23082006
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-SeriesAMD Raven Ridge (Ryzen 2000 APU)
Architecture codenameKabini (2013−2014)Dali (Zen)
Release date23 May 2013 (11 years ago)4 August 2020 (3 years ago)
Current price$421 no data

Detailed specifications

A6-5200 and 3020e 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 speedno data1.2 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz2.6 GHz
L1 cache256 KB192 KB
L2 cache2048 KB1 MB
L3 cache0 KB4 MB
Chip lithography28 nm14 nm
Die size246 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature90 °C105 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)90 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,178 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on A6-5200 and 3020e 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 configuration1no data
SocketFT3FT5
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-5200 and 3020e. 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, DDR3L-1600DDR4-2400, PCIe 3, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI++
FMAFMA4+
AVX++
PowerTune-no data
TrueAudio-no data
PowerNow+no data
PowerGating+no data
Out-of-band client management-no data
VirusProtect+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-5200 and 3020e are enumerated here.

AMD-V+no data
IOMMU 2.0+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-5200 and 3020e. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1600DDR4
Max memory channels1no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 8400AMD Radeon RX Vega 3
Number of pipelines128no data
Enduro+no data
Switchable graphics1no data
UVD+no data
VCE+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A6-5200 and 3020e integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+no data
HDMI+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A6-5200 and 3020e integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 11no data
Vulkan1no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A6-5200 and 3020e.

PCIe version2.0no 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.

A6-5200 1.07
3020e 1.58
+47.7%

3020e outperforms A6-5200 by 48% based on our aggregated 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%

A6-5200 1662
3020e 2446
+47.2%

3020e outperforms A6-5200 by 47% 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%

A6-5200 210
3020e 655
+212%

3020e outperforms A6-5200 by 212% 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%

A6-5200 597
3020e 1090
+82.6%

3020e outperforms A6-5200 by 83% in GeekBench 5 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%

A6-5200 26.1
+11.1%
3020e 29

3020e outperforms A6-5200 by 11% in wPrime 32.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

A6-5200 156
3020e 196
+25.6%

3020e outperforms A6-5200 by 26% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made 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 (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

A6-5200 42
3020e 92
+117%

3020e outperforms A6-5200 by 117% in Cinebench 15 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%

A6-5200 1.1
3020e 1.1
+4.8%

3020e outperforms A6-5200 by 5% 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%

A6-5200 1152
3020e 1232
+7%

3020e outperforms A6-5200 by 7% 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%

A6-5200 11
3020e 13
+12.3%

3020e outperforms A6-5200 by 12% 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%

A6-5200 52
3020e 65
+26.3%

3020e outperforms A6-5200 by 26% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.07 1.58
Integrated graphics card 0.68 2.97
Recency 23 May 2013 4 August 2020
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 6 Watt

The 3020e is our recommended choice as it beats the A6-5200 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A6-5200 and 3020e, 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 A6-5200
A6-5200
AMD 3020e
3020e

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.


3.7 185 votes

Rate A6-5200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 772 votes

Rate 3020e on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A6-5200 or 3020e, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.