A8-3800 vs C-60
Primary details
Comparing C-60 and A8-3800 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | 2170 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 2.06 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD C-Series | no data |
| Architecture codename | Ontario (2011−2012) | Llano (2011−2012) |
| Release date | 22 August 2011 (12 years ago) | 30 June 2011 (13 years ago) |
| Current price | $189 | $40 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
C-60 and A8-3800 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 1 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.33 GHz | 2.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 75 mm2 | 228 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 1,178 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on C-60 and A8-3800 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 |
| Socket | FT1 BGA 413-Ball | FM1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 9 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by C-60 and A8-3800. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-V, Radeon HD 6290 (276-400 MHz) | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by C-60 and A8-3800 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by C-60 and A8-3800. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 Single-channel | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon HD 6290 | AMD Radeon HD 6550D |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
A8-3800 outperforms C-60 by 555% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
A8-3800 outperforms C-60 by 283% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
A8-3800 outperforms C-60 by 548% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 22 August 2011 | 30 June 2011 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 9 Watt | 65 Watt |
We couldn't decide between C-60 and A8-3800. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that C-60 is a notebook processor while A8-3800 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between C-60 and A8-3800, 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.
