Apple M1 vs A6-5200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A6-5200
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 25 Watt
1.05

Apple M1 outperforms A6-5200 by a whopping 392% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A6-5200 and Apple M1 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking24241194
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-SeriesApple Apple M-Series
Power efficiency3.97no data
Architecture codenameKabini (2013−2014)no data
Release date23 May 2013 (11 years ago)10 November 2020 (4 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A6-5200 and Apple M1 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)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads48
Base clock speedno data2.064 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz3.2 GHz
L1 cache256 KB2 MB
L2 cache2048 KB16 MB
L3 cache0 KB16 MB
Chip lithography28 nm5 nm
Die size246 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)90 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,178 million16000 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A6-5200 and Apple M1 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
SocketFT3no data
Power consumption (TDP)25 Wattno data

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-5200 and Apple M1. 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, AVXno data
AES-NI+-
FMAFMA4-
AVX+-
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
VirusProtect+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-5200 and Apple M1 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
IOMMU 2.0+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-5200 and Apple M1. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1600no data
Max memory channels1no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 8400Apple M1 8-Core GPU
Number of pipelines128no data
Enduro+-
Switchable graphics+-
UVD+-
VCE+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A6-5200 and Apple M1 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A6-5200 and Apple M1 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 11no data
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A6-5200 and Apple M1.

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 1.05
Apple M1 5.17
+392%

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.

A6-5200 1663
Apple M1 8207
+394%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

A6-5200 156
Apple M1 1072
+587%

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.

A6-5200 42
Apple M1 208
+391%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.05 5.17
Integrated graphics card 0.69 14.54
Recency 23 May 2013 10 November 2020
Physical cores 4 8
Threads 4 8
Chip lithography 28 nm 5 nm

Apple M1 has a 392.4% higher aggregate performance score, 2007.2% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 7 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.

The Apple M1 is our recommended choice as it beats the A6-5200 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A6-5200 and Apple M1, 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
Apple M1
M1

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.


3.6 210 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 2237 votes

Rate Apple M1 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A6-5200 or Apple M1, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.