A4-6320 vs A8-7410

VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-7410
2015
4 cores / 4 threads, 12 Watt
1.76
+79.6%
A4-6320
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.98

A8-7410 outperforms A4-6320 by an impressive 80% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A8-7410 and A4-6320 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking20302485
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD A-Seriesno data
Power efficiency6.541.40
Architecture codenameCarrizo-L (2015)Richland (2013−2014)
Release date7 May 2015 (9 years ago)December 2013 (10 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A8-7410 and A4-6320 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 speed2.2 GHz3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz4 GHz
L1 cacheno data96 KB
L2 cache2048 KB1024 KB
Chip lithography28 nm32 nm
Die sizeno data246 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °C70 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data70 °C
Number of transistors930 Million1,303 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on A8-7410 and A4-6320 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 configurationno data1
SocketFP4FM2
Power consumption (TDP)12 - 25 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-7410 and A4-6320. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX, SSE4.2, AES, AVX, BMI1, F16C, AMD64, VT, AMD-Vno data
AES-NI++
FMAFMA4+
AVX++
PowerNow++
PowerGating++
VirusProtect++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-7410 and A4-6320 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-7410 and A4-6320. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3L-1866DDR3-1600
Max memory channels12

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R5 GraphicsAMD Radeon™ HD 8370D
Number of pipelinesno data128
Enduro++
Switchable graphics++
UVD++
VCE++

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A8-7410 and A4-6320 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort++
HDMI++

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A8-7410 and A4-6320 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12DirectX® 11
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A8-7410 and A4-6320.

PCIe version2.02.0

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.

A8-7410 1.76
+79.6%
A4-6320 0.98

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.

A8-7410 2741
+79.2%
A4-6320 1530

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.76 0.98
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 28 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 65 Watt

A8-7410 has a 79.6% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 441.7% lower power consumption.

The A8-7410 is our recommended choice as it beats the A4-6320 in performance tests.

Be aware that A8-7410 is a notebook processor while A4-6320 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A8-7410 and A4-6320, 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 A8-7410
A8-7410
AMD A4-6320
A4-6320

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.


3.3 694 votes

Rate A8-7410 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate A4-6320 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A8-7410 or A4-6320, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.