E2-1800 vs A8-3520M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-3520M
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
0.91
+225%
E2-1800
2012
2 cores / 2 threads, 18 Watt
0.28

A8-3520M outperforms E2-1800 by a whopping 225% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A8-3520M and E2-1800 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25433132
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD A-SeriesAMD E-Series
Power efficiency2.461.47
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Zacate (2011−2013)
Release date20 December 2011 (13 years ago)6 June 2012 (12 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A8-3520M and E2-1800 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 speed1.6 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz1.7 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm40 nm
Die size228 mm275 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data100 °C
Number of transistors1,178 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A8-3520M and E2-1800 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
SocketFS1FT1 BGA 413-Ball
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt18 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-3520M and E2-1800. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6620GMMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-V
PowerNow-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-3520M and E2-1800 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-3520M and E2-1800. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 6620G (444 MHz)AMD Radeon HD 7340

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.

A8-3520M 0.91
+225%
E2-1800 0.28

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.

A8-3520M 1441
+221%
E2-1800 449

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.

A8-3520M 255
+136%
E2-1800 108

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.

A8-3520M 687
+280%
E2-1800 181

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.

A8-3520M 1757
+58.3%
E2-1800 1110

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.

A8-3520M 5676
+168%
E2-1800 2121

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

A8-3520M 2483
+129%
E2-1800 1083

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.

A8-3520M 22.43
+208%
E2-1800 69.05

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.

A8-3520M 2
+214%
E2-1800 1

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.

A8-3520M 0.51
+54.5%
E2-1800 0.33

Geekbench 2

A8-3520M 3501
+96.6%
E2-1800 1781

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.91 0.28
Integrated graphics card 0.89 0.40
Recency 20 December 2011 6 June 2012
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 18 Watt

A8-3520M has a 225% higher aggregate performance score, 122.5% faster integrated GPU, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 25% more advanced lithography process.

E2-1800, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 months, and 94.4% lower power consumption.

The A8-3520M is our recommended choice as it beats the E2-1800 in performance tests.

Be aware that A8-3520M is a notebook processor while E2-1800 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A8-3520M and E2-1800, 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 A8-3520M
A8-3520M
AMD E2-1800
E2-1800

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.


3.6 103 votes

Rate A8-3520M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 166 votes

Rate E2-1800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A8-3520M or E2-1800, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.