A8-3500M vs Phenom II X4 X920 BE

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Phenom II X4 X920 BE
2010
4 cores / 4 threads, 45 Watt
1.50
+64.8%

Phenom II X4 X920 BE outperforms A8-3500M by an impressive 65% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Phenom II X4 X920 BE and A8-3500M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking21322513
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Series4x AMD Phenom IIAMD A-Series
Architecture codenameChamplain (2010−2011)Llano (2011−2012)
Release date12 May 2010 (14 years ago)14 June 2011 (13 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Phenom II X4 X920 BE and A8-3500M 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 data1.5 GHz
Boost clock speed2.3 GHz2.4 GHz
Bus rate3600 MHzno data
L1 cache256 KB128 KB (per core)
L2 cache2 MB4 MB
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm32 nm
Die sizeno data218 mm2
Number of transistorsno data1000 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Phenom II X4 X920 BE and A8-3500M 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 configurationno data1
SocketS1FS1
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X4 X920 BE and A8-3500M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsHyperTransport 3.0, Enhanced Virus Protection, AMD64, SSE4A, unlocked multiplier3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6620G
VirusProtect+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom II X4 X920 BE and A8-3500M are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom II X4 X920 BE and A8-3500M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon HD 6620G

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.

Phenom II X4 X920 BE 1.50
+64.8%
A8-3500M 0.91

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.

Phenom II X4 X920 BE 1935
+22%
A8-3500M 1586

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.

Phenom II X4 X920 BE 7082
+37%
A8-3500M 5170

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.

Phenom II X4 X920 BE 3164
+40.3%
A8-3500M 2256

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.

Phenom II X4 X920 BE 17.5
+37.7%
A8-3500M 24.09

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.

Phenom II X4 X920 BE 3
+38.8%
A8-3500M 2

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.50 0.91
Recency 12 May 2010 14 June 2011
Chip lithography 45 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 35 Watt

Phenom II X4 X920 BE has a 64.8% higher aggregate performance score.

A8-3500M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 40.6% more advanced lithography process, and 28.6% lower power consumption.

The Phenom II X4 X920 BE is our recommended choice as it beats the A8-3500M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X4 X920 BE and A8-3500M, 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.


AMD Phenom II X4 X920 BE
Phenom II X4 X920 BE
AMD A8-3500M
A8-3500M

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.


4 12 votes

Rate Phenom II X4 X920 BE on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 117 votes

Rate A8-3500M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Phenom II X4 X920 BE or A8-3500M, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.