A10 Micro-6700T vs Phenom II X4 905e
Aggregate performance score
Phenom II X4 905e outperforms A10 Micro-6700T by a substantial 37% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Phenom II X4 905e and A10 Micro-6700T processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2288 | 2501 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.06 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | 4x Phenom II (Desktop) | AMD A-Series |
| Architecture codename | Deneb (2009−2011) | Mullins (2014) |
| Release date | 2 June 2009 (15 years ago) | 29 April 2014 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $212 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Phenom II X4 905e and A10 Micro-6700T 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 1.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 2.2 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 2048 KB |
| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | no data |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 28 nm |
| Die size | 258 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 758 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom II X4 905e and A10 Micro-6700T 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 | no data |
| Socket | AM3 | FT3b |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 4.5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X4 905e and A10 Micro-6700T. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 45 nm, 1.25 | 86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| FMA | - | FMA4 |
| AVX | - | + |
| PowerNow | - | + |
| PowerGating | - | + |
| VirusProtect | - | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom II X4 905e and A10 Micro-6700T are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
| IOMMU 2.0 | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom II X4 905e and A10 Micro-6700T. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3-1333 |
| Max memory channels | no data | 1 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | AMD Radeon R6 Graphics |
| Enduro | - | + |
| Switchable graphics | - | + |
| UVD | - | + |
| VCE | - | + |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Phenom II X4 905e and A10 Micro-6700T integrated GPUs.
| DisplayPort | - | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Phenom II X4 905e and A10 Micro-6700T integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | DirectX® 12 |
| Vulkan | - | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Phenom II X4 905e and A10 Micro-6700T.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 2.0 |
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.26 | 0.92 |
| Recency | 2 June 2009 | 29 April 2014 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 4 Watt |
Phenom II X4 905e has a 37% higher aggregate performance score.
A10 Micro-6700T, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 60.7% more advanced lithography process, and 1525% lower power consumption.
The Phenom II X4 905e is our recommended choice as it beats the A10 Micro-6700T in performance tests.
Note that Phenom II X4 905e is a desktop processor while A10 Micro-6700T is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X4 905e and A10 Micro-6700T, 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.
