A10-4657M vs Opteron 142

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Opteron 142
2003
1 core / 1 thread, 85 Watt
0.16

A10-4657M outperforms Opteron 142 by a whopping 531% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking35902731
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentServerLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD A-Series
Power efficiency0.081.22
DesignerAMDAMD
Architecture codenameSledgeHammer (2003−2005)Trinity (2012−2013)
Release dateSeptember 2003 (22 years ago)1 April 2013 (13 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Basic parameters of Opteron 142 and A10-4657M: 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 cores1 (Single-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads14
Base clock speedno data2.3 GHz
Boost clock speed1.6 GHz3.2 GHz
L1 cache128 KBno data
L2 cache1 MB4 MB
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography130 nm32 nm
Die size193 mm2246 mm2
Number of transistors106 million1303 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Opteron 142 and A10-4657M 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 configuration1no data
Socket940BGA
Power consumption (TDP)85 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Opteron 142 and A10-4657M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno data86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, FMA
AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon HD 7660G (497 - 686 MHz)

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.

Opteron 142 0.16
A10-4657M 1.01
+531%

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.

Opteron 142 278
Samples: 1
A10-4657M 1759
+533%
Samples: 3

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.16 1.01
Physical cores 1 4
Threads 1 4
Chip lithography 130 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 85 Watt 35 Watt

A10-4657M has a 531% higher aggregate performance score, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 306% more advanced lithography process, and 143% lower power consumption.

The AMD A10-4657M is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Opteron 142 in performance tests.

Be aware that Opteron 142 is a server/workstation processor while A10-4657M 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.

Community ratings

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


2.7 6 votes

Rate Opteron 142 on a scale of 1 to 5:

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

Rate A10-4657M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors Opteron 142 and A10-4657M, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.