A8-4500M vs FX-8370E
Aggregate performance score
FX-8370E outperforms A8-4500M by a whopping 214% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1816 | 2689 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.69 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | AMD A-Series |
| Power efficiency | 1.35 | 1.17 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Manufacturer | GlobalFoundries | no data |
| Architecture codename | Vishera (2012−2015) | Trinity (2012−2013) |
| Release date | 2 September 2014 (11 years ago) | 15 May 2012 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $199 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
FX-8370E and A8-4500M 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 | 8 (Octa-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 3.3 GHz | 1.9 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.3 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 192 KB |
| L2 cache | 8192 KB | 4 MB (shared) |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 315 mm2 | 246 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 71 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,200 million | 1,178 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
| P0 Vcore voltage | Min: 1.075 V - Max: 1.2875 V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on FX-8370E and A8-4500M 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 | AM3+ | FS1r2 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8370E and A8-4500M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | 86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, FMA |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-8370E and A8-4500M are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-8370E and A8-4500M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | unknown |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | AMD Radeon HD 7640G (496 - 685 MHz) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8370E and A8-4500M.
| PCIe version | n/a | no data |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.01 | 0.96 |
| Recency | 2 September 2014 | 15 May 2012 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 4 |
| Threads | 8 | 4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 35 Watt |
FX-8370E has a 213.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
A8-4500M, on the other hand, has 171.4% lower power consumption.
The AMD FX-8370E is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD A8-4500M in performance tests.
Note that FX-8370E is a desktop processor while A8-4500M is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
