M3-8100Y vs Athlon II X4 610e
Primary details
Comparing Athlon II X4 610e and M3-8100Y processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2318 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.49 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Core M3 |
| Power efficiency | 2.61 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Propus (2009−2011) | Amber Lake (2018−2019) |
| Release date | 11 May 2010 (14 years ago) | 28 August 2018 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $70 | $281 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Athlon II X4 610e and M3-8100Y 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 | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 1.1 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | OPI |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 16 |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 4 MB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 169 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 300 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon II X4 610e and M3-8100Y 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 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | AM3 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon II X4 610e and M3-8100Y. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon II X4 610e and M3-8100Y are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon II X4 610e and M3-8100Y. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3L-1600 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 16 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 29.861 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel UHD Graphics 615 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon II X4 610e and M3-8100Y.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 10 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 11 May 2010 | 28 August 2018 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 5 Watt |
Athlon II X4 610e has 100% more physical cores.
M3-8100Y, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 years, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 800% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Athlon II X4 610e and M3-8100Y. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Athlon II X4 610e is a desktop processor while M3-8100Y is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon II X4 610e and M3-8100Y, 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.
