A6-3420M vs Core i7-975

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i7-975
2009
4 cores / 8 threads, 130 Watt
2.26
+169%

i7-975 outperforms A6-3420M by a whopping 169% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i7-975 and A6-3420M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking17382482
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.74no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesCore i7 (Desktop)AMD A-Series
Architecture codenameBloomfield (2008−2010)Llano (2011−2012)
Release dateJune 2009 (15 years ago)20 December 2011 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$476no data
Current price$250 (0.5x MSRP)$1578

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Core i7-975 and A6-3420M 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads84
Base clock speed3.33 GHz1.5 GHz
Boost clock speed3.6 GHz2.4 GHz
Bus support1333 MHzno data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)128 KB (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache8 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm32 nm
Die size263 mm2228 mm2
Maximum core temperature68 °Cno data
Number of transistors731 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierYesNo

Compatibility

Information on Core i7-975 and A6-3420M 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
SocketFCLGA1366FS1
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-975 and A6-3420M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.23DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6480G, DDR3(L)-1333 Memory Controller
AES-NI-no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology1.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring-no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
PAE36 Bitno data
StatusDiscontinuedno data

Security technologies

Core i7-975 and A6-3420M 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 i7-975 and A6-3420M are enumerated here.

AMD-Vno data+
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-975 and A6-3420M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size24 GBno data
Max memory channels3no data
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data
ECC memory support-no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon HD 6520G

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.

i7-975 2.26
+169%
A6-3420M 0.84

Core i7-975 outperforms A6-3420M by 169% based on our aggregate 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%

i7-975 3493
+170%
A6-3420M 1292

Core i7-975 outperforms A6-3420M by 170% 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%

i7-975 540
+135%
A6-3420M 230

Core i7-975 outperforms A6-3420M by 135% 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%

i7-975 1892
+219%
A6-3420M 593

Core i7-975 outperforms A6-3420M by 219% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

i7-975 4101
+145%
A6-3420M 1673

Core i7-975 outperforms A6-3420M by 145% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

i7-975 16628
+208%
A6-3420M 5399

Core i7-975 outperforms A6-3420M by 208% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

i7-975 5837
+153%
A6-3420M 2305

Core i7-975 outperforms A6-3420M by 153% in 3DMark06 CPU.

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%

i7-975 7.36
+221%
A6-3420M 23.64

A6-3420M outperforms Core i7-975 by 221% 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%

i7-975 6
+208%
A6-3420M 2

Core i7-975 outperforms A6-3420M by 208% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.26 0.84
Threads 8 4
Chip lithography 45 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 35 Watt

The Core i7-975 is our recommended choice as it beats the A6-3420M in performance tests.

Note that Core i7-975 is a desktop processor while A6-3420M is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-975 and A6-3420M, 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.


Intel Core i7-975
Core i7-975
AMD A6-3420M
A6-3420M

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.


3.6 24 votes

Rate Core i7-975 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 179 votes

Rate A6-3420M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i7-975 or A6-3420M, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.