A4-3300M vs A8-6500B

VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-6500B
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
1.86
+145%
A4-3300M
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.76

A8-6500B outperforms A4-3300M by a whopping 145% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A8-6500B and A4-3300M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking19962653
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD A-Series
Power efficiency2.662.02
Architecture codenameRichland (2013−2014)Llano (2011−2012)
Release date1 June 2013 (11 years ago)14 June 2011 (13 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A8-6500B and A4-3300M 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 speed3.5 GHz1.9 GHz
Boost clock speed4.1 GHz2.5 GHz
L1 cache192K128 KB (per core)
L2 cache4 MB1 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size246 mm2228 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)71 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,303 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibilityno data-

Compatibility

Information on A8-6500B and A4-3300M 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
SocketFM2FS1
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-6500B and A4-3300M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno data3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6480G
AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-
PowerNow+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-6500B and A4-3300M are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-6500B and A4-3300M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1866DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 8570DAMD Radeon HD 6480G

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A8-6500B and A4-3300M.

PCIe version2.0no data

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.

A8-6500B 1.86
+145%
A4-3300M 0.76

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.

A8-6500B 2894
+144%
A4-3300M 1186

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.

A8-6500B 451
+97.8%
A4-3300M 228

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.

A8-6500B 985
+151%
A4-3300M 392

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.86 0.76
Integrated graphics card 1.12 0.66
Recency 1 June 2013 14 June 2011
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 35 Watt

A8-6500B has a 144.7% higher aggregate performance score, 69.7% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 1 year, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

A4-3300M, on the other hand, has 85.7% lower power consumption.

The A8-6500B is our recommended choice as it beats the A4-3300M in performance tests.

Note that A8-6500B is a desktop processor while A4-3300M is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A8-6500B and A4-3300M, 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 A8-6500B
A8-6500B
AMD A4-3300M
A4-3300M

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.


4.2 17 votes

Rate A8-6500B on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 110 votes

Rate A4-3300M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A8-6500B or A4-3300M, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.