Atom Z2760 vs A8-3850

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-3850
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 100 Watt
1.42
+735%

A8-3850 outperforms Atom Z2760 by a whopping 735% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25483663
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesA-Series (Desktop)no data
Power efficiency0.592.35
DesignerAMDIntel
Manufacturerno dataIntel
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Cloverview (2012)
Release date30 June 2011 (15 years ago)27 September 2012 (13 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Basic parameters of A8-3850 and Atom Z2760: 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)
Threads44
Base clock speed2.9 GHz1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.9 GHz1.8 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size228 mm265 mm2
Number of transistors1,178 million140 million
64 bit support+-
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A8-3850 and Atom Z2760 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
SocketFM1FC-MB4760
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt3 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-3850 and Atom Z2760. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-3850 and Atom Z2760 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-xno data-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-3850 and Atom Z2760. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR2
Maximum memory sizeno data2.4 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data6.4 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon HD 6550DPowerVR SGX545 (533 MHz)

Synthetic benchmarks

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.

A8-3850 1.42
+735%
Atom Z2760 0.17

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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.

A8-3850 2431
+716%
Samples: 534
Atom Z2760 298
Samples: 35

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.

A8-3850 2649
+340%
Atom Z2760 602

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.

A8-3850 9534
+462%
Atom Z2760 1697

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.

A8-3850 14.2
+309%
Atom Z2760 58.13

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.

A8-3850 4027
+326%
Atom Z2760 945

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.

A8-3850 3
+545%
Atom Z2760 1

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.42 0.17
Recency 30 June 2011 27 September 2012
Physical cores 4 2
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 3 Watt

A8-3850 has a 735% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores.

Atom Z2760, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and 3233% lower power consumption.

The AMD A8-3850 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Atom Z2760 in performance tests.

Note that A8-3850 is a desktop processor while Atom Z2760 is a notebook one.

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.8 186 votes

Rate A8-3850 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.6 21 votes

Rate Atom Z2760 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors A8-3850 and Atom Z2760, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.