Processor 300 vs A8-7200P
Aggregate performance score
Processor 300 outperforms A8-7200P by a whopping 232% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A8-7200P and Processor 300 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2253 | 1320 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD Kaveri | no data |
| Power efficiency | 3.68 | 9.28 |
| Architecture codename | Kaveri (2014−2015) | Raptor Lake-S (2023−2024) |
| Release date | 4 June 2014 (10 years ago) | 8 January 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $82 |
Detailed specifications
A8-7200P and Processor 300 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 3.9 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.3 GHz | 3.9 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 80 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 4096 KB | 1.25 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 245 mm2 | 163 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 102 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 2410 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on A8-7200P and Processor 300 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 | no data | 1 |
| Socket | FP3 | 1700 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 46 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-7200P and Processor 300. 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 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | + |
| FRTC | + | - |
| TrueAudio | + | - |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| PowerGating | + | - |
| Out-of-band client management | + | - |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
| HSA | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
Security technologies
A8-7200P and Processor 300 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-7200P and Processor 300 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| IOMMU 2.0 | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-7200P and Processor 300. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3-1866 | DDR4, DDR5 |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon R5 Graphics | Intel UHD Graphics 710 |
| iGPU core count | 4 | no data |
| Enduro | + | - |
| Switchable graphics | + | - |
| UVD | + | - |
| VCE | + | - |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of A8-7200P and Processor 300 integrated GPUs.
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by A8-7200P and Processor 300 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | no data |
| Vulkan | + | - |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A8-7200P and Processor 300.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
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 | 1.36 | 4.51 |
| Recency | 4 June 2014 | 8 January 2024 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 46 Watt |
A8-7200P has 100% more physical cores, and 31.4% lower power consumption.
Processor 300, on the other hand, has a 231.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, and a 180% more advanced lithography process.
The Processor 300 is our recommended choice as it beats the A8-7200P in performance tests.
Be aware that A8-7200P is a notebook processor while Processor 300 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between A8-7200P and Processor 300, 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.
