A6-1450 vs E2-3800

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

E2-3800
2013
4 cores / 4 threads
0.74
+10.4%

E2-3800 outperforms A6-1450 by 10% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

General info

Comparing E2-3800 and A6-1450 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking25432597
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-SeriesAMD A-Series
Architecture codenameKabini (2013−2014)Temash (2013)
Release date23 May 2013 (10 years ago)23 May 2013 (10 years ago)
Current price$107 $207

Technical specs

E2-3800 and A6-1450 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)
Threads44
Base clock speedno data1 GHz
Boost clock speed1.3 GHz1.4 GHz
L1 cache128 KB128K (per core)
L2 cache2048 KB512K (per core)
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography28 nm32 nm
Die size107 mm2246 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)90 °C90 °C
Number of transistorsno data1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on E2-3800 and A6-1450 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
SocketFT3FT3
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt8 - 15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by E2-3800 and A6-1450. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, DDR3L-160086x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX
AES-NI++
FMAFMA4no data
AVX++
PowerTune-no data
TrueAudio-no data
PowerNow+no data
PowerGating+no data
Out-of-band client management-no data
VirusProtect+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by E2-3800 and A6-1450 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by E2-3800 and A6-1450. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1600DDR3
Max memory channels1no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 8280AMD Radeon HD 8250
Number of pipelines128no data
Enduro+no data
Switchable graphics1no data
UVD+no data
VCE+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of E2-3800 and A6-1450 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+no data
HDMI+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by E2-3800 and A6-1450 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan1no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by E2-3800 and A6-1450.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes4no data

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.

E2-3800 0.74
+10.4%
A6-1450 0.67

E2-3800 outperforms A6-1450 by 10% 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%

E2-3800 1148
+9.9%
A6-1450 1045

E2-3800 outperforms A6-1450 by 10% 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%

E2-3800 154
+2%
A6-1450 151

E2-3800 outperforms A6-1450 by 2% 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%

E2-3800 485
+8.7%
A6-1450 446

E2-3800 outperforms A6-1450 by 9% 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%

E2-3800 2295
+116%
A6-1450 1064

E2-3800 outperforms A6-1450 by 116% 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%

E2-3800 3575
+25%
A6-1450 2861

E2-3800 outperforms A6-1450 by 25% in Cinebench 10 32-bit 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%

E2-3800 42.64
+40.7%
A6-1450 60

A6-1450 outperforms E2-3800 by 41% 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%

E2-3800 1
+24.3%
A6-1450 1

E2-3800 outperforms A6-1450 by 24% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

E2-3800 0.32
A6-1450 0.34
+6.3%

A6-1450 outperforms E2-3800 by 6% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

E2-3800 0.8
+17.9%
A6-1450 0.7

E2-3800 outperforms A6-1450 by 18% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

E2-3800 963
+22.7%
A6-1450 785

E2-3800 outperforms A6-1450 by 23% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

E2-3800 36
+22.9%
A6-1450 29

E2-3800 outperforms A6-1450 by 23% in x264 encoding pass 1.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

E2-3800 8
+24.2%
A6-1450 6

E2-3800 outperforms A6-1450 by 24% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Geekbench 2

Benchmark coverage: 5%

E2-3800 2653
+41.4%
A6-1450 1876

E2-3800 outperforms A6-1450 by 41% in Geekbench 2.

Gaming performance

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 0.74 0.67
Integrated graphics card 0.67 0.56
Chip lithography 28 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 8 Watt

The E2-3800 is our recommended choice as it beats the A6-1450 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between E2-3800 and A6-1450, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD E2-3800
E2-3800
AMD A6-1450
A6-1450

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.

User Ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.4 65 votes

Rate E2-3800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 36 votes

Rate A6-1450 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about E2-3800 or A6-1450, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.