A8-3850 vs A8-5600K
Aggregated performance score
A8-5600K outperforms A8-3850 by 21% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
General info
Comparing A8-5600K and A8-3850 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1874 | 2003 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Value for money | 3.69 | 2.77 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD A-Series (Desktop) | A-Series (Desktop) |
| Architecture codename | Trinity (2012−2013) | Llano (2011−2012) |
| Release date | 2 October 2012 (11 years old) | 30 June 2011 (12 years old) |
| Current price | $56 | $38 |
Value for money
Performance per price, higher is better.
A8-5600K has 33% better value for money than A8-3850.
Technical specs
A8-5600K and A8-3850 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 | 3.6 GHz | 2.9 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.9 GHz | 2.9 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128K (per core) | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | 228 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 1,178 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | Yes | No |
Compatibility
Information on A8-5600K and A8-3850 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 | 1 |
| Socket | FM2 | FM1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 100 Watt |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-5600K and A8-3850 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-5600K and A8-3850. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon HD 7560D | AMD Radeon HD 6550D |
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.
A8-5600K outperforms A8-3850 by 21% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
A8-5600K outperforms A8-3850 by 21% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
A8-5600K outperforms A8-3850 by 38% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
A8-5600K outperforms A8-3850 by 16% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 20%
A8-5600K outperforms A8-3850 by 11% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
A8-3850 outperforms A8-5600K by 8% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
A8-5600K outperforms A8-3850 by 7% in 3DMark06 CPU.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 18%
A8-5600K outperforms A8-3850 by 18% in wPrime 32.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 17%
A8-3850 outperforms A8-5600K by 7% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.
Advantages and disadvantages
| Performance score | 1.86 | 1.54 |
| Integrated graphics card | 1.18 | 1.04 |
| Recency | 2 October 2012 | 30 June 2011 |
The A8-5600K is our recommended choice as it beats the A8-3850 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between A8-5600K and A8-3850, 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.
