E1-6010 vs Athlon X4 840

VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon X4 840
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
2.09
+515%
E1-6010
2014
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.34

Athlon X4 840 outperforms E1-6010 by a whopping 515% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon X4 840 and E1-6010 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking18913081
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Series4x AthlonAMD E-Series
Power efficiency3.043.22
Architecture codenameKaveri (2014−2015)Beema (2014)
Release dateAugust 2014 (10 years ago)29 April 2014 (10 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Athlon X4 840 and E1-6010 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 speed3.1 GHzno data
Boost clock speed3.8 GHz1.35 GHz
L1 cache256Kno data
L2 cache4 MB1024 KB
Chip lithography28 nm28 nm
Die size245 mm2107 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °C90 °C
Number of transistors2,411 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Athlon X4 840 and E1-6010 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
SocketSocket FM2+FT3b
Power consumption (TDP)65 watt10 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon X4 840 and E1-6010. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno data86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX
AES-NI++
FMA+FMA4
AVX++
PowerNow-+
PowerGating-+
VirusProtect-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon X4 840 and E1-6010 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon X4 840 and E1-6010. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon R2 Graphics
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Athlon X4 840 and E1-6010 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Athlon X4 840 and E1-6010 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon X4 840 and E1-6010.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanes168

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.

Athlon X4 840 2.09
+515%
E1-6010 0.34

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.

Athlon X4 840 3318
+521%
E1-6010 534

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.

Athlon X4 840 448
+250%
E1-6010 128

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.

Athlon X4 840 1120
+411%
E1-6010 219

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.09 0.34
Recency on August 2014 29 April 2014
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 10 Watt

Athlon X4 840 has a 514.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 months, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

E1-6010, on the other hand, has 550% lower power consumption.

The Athlon X4 840 is our recommended choice as it beats the E1-6010 in performance tests.

Note that Athlon X4 840 is a desktop processor while E1-6010 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon X4 840 and E1-6010, 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 Athlon X4 840
Athlon X4 840
AMD E1-6010
E1-6010

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.


3.8 626 votes

Rate Athlon X4 840 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 562 votes

Rate E1-6010 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon X4 840 or E1-6010, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.