A4-3310MX vs Core 2 Duo T7500
Aggregated performance score
Core 2 Duo T7500 outperforms A4-3310MX by a minimal 4% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core 2 Duo T7500 and A4-3310MX processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2723 | 2749 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Core 2 Duo | AMD A-Series |
| Architecture codename | Merom (2006−2008) | Llano (2011−2012) |
| Release date | 8 May 2007 (17 years ago) | 14 June 2011 (12 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $234 | no data |
| Current price | $62 (0.3x MSRP) | $136 |
Detailed specifications
Core 2 Duo T7500 and A4-3310MX 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 2.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 2.5 GHz |
| Bus support | 800 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 4 MB | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 143 mm2 | 228 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 291 Million | 1,178 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
| VID voltage range | 1.075V - 1.25V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Core 2 Duo T7500 and A4-3310MX 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 | PBGA479,PPGA478 | FS1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Duo T7500 and A4-3310MX. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | 3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, DDR3 Memory Controller, Radeon HD 6480G |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
| Status | Discontinued | no data |
Security technologies
Core 2 Duo T7500 and A4-3310MX technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Duo T7500 and A4-3310MX are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | no data | + |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Duo T7500 and A4-3310MX. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon HD 6480G |
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.
Core 2 Duo T7500 outperforms A4-3310MX by 4% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
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%
Core 2 Duo T7500 outperforms A4-3310MX by 5% 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%
A4-3310MX outperforms Core 2 Duo T7500 by 21% 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%
A4-3310MX outperforms Core 2 Duo T7500 by 34% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
wPrime 32
wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.
Benchmark coverage: 18%
A4-3310MX outperforms Core 2 Duo T7500 by 11% in wPrime 32.
Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.
Benchmark coverage: 17%
A4-3310MX outperforms Core 2 Duo T7500 by 18% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.53 | 0.51 |
| Recency | 8 May 2007 | 14 June 2011 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 32 nm |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Core 2 Duo T7500 and A4-3310MX.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo T7500 and A4-3310MX, 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.
