Processor N200 vs A8-5557M

VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-5557M
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
1.13
Processor N200
2023
4 cores / 4 threads, 6 Watt
1.56
+38.1%

Processor N200 outperforms A8-5557M by a substantial 38% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A8-5557M and Processor N200 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking23952122
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-SeriesIntel Alder Lake-N
Power efficiency3.0524.59
Architecture codenameRichland (2013−2014)Alder Lake-N (2023)
Release date1 June 2013 (11 years ago)3 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$193

Detailed specifications

A8-5557M and Processor N200 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed2.1 GHz0.1 GHz
Boost clock speed3.1 GHz3.7 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)96 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)2 MB (shared)
L3 cache0 KB6 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm10 nm
Die size246 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)71 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,178 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on A8-5557M and Processor N200 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
SocketFP2Intel BGA 1264
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-5557M and Processor N200. 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, FMAno data
AES-NI++
FMA+-
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+

Security technologies

A8-5557M and Processor N200 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-5557M and Processor N200 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-5557M and Processor N200. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4, DDR5 4800 MHz Single-channel

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 8550G (554 - 720 MHz)Intel UHD Graphics Xe 750 32EUs (Rocket Lake) (450 - 750 MHz)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A8-5557M and Processor N200.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data9

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.

A8-5557M 1.13
Processor N200 1.56
+38.1%

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.

A8-5557M 2115
Processor N200 3937
+86.1%

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.

A8-5557M 5259
Processor N200 7549
+43.5%

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.

A8-5557M 2747
Processor N200 3902
+42%

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.

A8-5557M 26.82
Processor N200 25.99
+3.2%

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.

A8-5557M 2
Processor N200 3
+42.9%

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.

A8-5557M 0.78
Processor N200 1.36
+74.4%

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.

A8-5557M 1.1
Processor N200 3.2
+191%

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.

A8-5557M 1860
Processor N200 2115
+13.7%

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.  

A8-5557M 12
Processor N200 16
+31.5%

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.  

A8-5557M 63
Processor N200 80
+27.9%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.13 1.56
Integrated graphics card 1.07 3.29
Recency 1 June 2013 3 January 2023
Chip lithography 32 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 6 Watt

Processor N200 has a 38.1% higher aggregate performance score, 207.5% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 9 years, a 220% more advanced lithography process, and 483.3% lower power consumption.

The Processor N200 is our recommended choice as it beats the A8-5557M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A8-5557M and Processor N200, 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 A8-5557M
A8-5557M
Intel Processor N200
Processor N200

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 27 votes

Rate A8-5557M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 148 votes

Rate Processor N200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A8-5557M or Processor N200, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.