A10-4657M vs A8-4500M
Aggregate performance score
A10-4657M outperforms A8-4500M by a small 5% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A8-4500M and A10-4657M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2411 | 2391 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD A-Series | AMD A-Series |
| Power efficiency | 2.87 | 3.00 |
| Architecture codename | Trinity (2012−2013) | Trinity (2012−2013) |
| Release date | 15 May 2012 (12 years ago) | 1 April 2013 (11 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
A8-4500M and A10-4657M 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 cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 1.9 GHz | 2.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| L1 cache | 192 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 4 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | 246 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 1303 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on A8-4500M and A10-4657M 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 configuration | 1 | no data |
| Socket | FS1r2 | BGA |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-4500M and A10-4657M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, FMA | 86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, FMA |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-4500M and A10-4657M are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-4500M and A10-4657M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | unknown | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon HD 7640G | AMD Radeon HD 7660G |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.10 | 1.15 |
| Integrated graphics card | 1.19 | 1.23 |
| Recency | 15 May 2012 | 1 April 2013 |
A10-4657M has a 4.5% higher aggregate performance score, 3.4% faster integrated GPU, and an age advantage of 10 months.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A8-4500M and A10-4657M.
Should you still have questions on choice between A8-4500M and A10-4657M, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
