3020e vs Pro A10-8700B

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Pro A10-8700B
2015
4 cores / 4 threads, 12 Watt
1.43

3020e outperforms Pro A10-8700B by a moderate 10% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Pro A10-8700B and 3020e processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking21102016
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD CarrizoAMD Raven Ridge (Ryzen 2000 APU)
Architecture codenameCarrizo (2015−2018)Dali (Zen)
Release date3 June 2015 (9 years ago)4 August 2020 (3 years ago)
Current price$326 no data

Detailed specifications

Pro A10-8700B and 3020e 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed1.8 GHz1.2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.2 GHz2.6 GHz
L1 cacheno data192 KB
L2 cache2048 KB1 MB
L3 cacheno data4 MB
Chip lithography28 nm14 nm
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Number of transistors3100 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Pro A10-8700B and 3020e 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.

SocketFP4FT5
Power consumption (TDP)12 - 35 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Pro A10-8700B and 3020e. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsHSA 1.0DDR4-2400, PCIe 3, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI1+
FMAFMA4+
AVXAVX+
FRTC1no data
FreeSync1no data
PowerTune-no data
TrueAudio+no data
PowerNow+no data
PowerGating+no data
Out-of-band client management+no data
VirusProtect+no data
RAID+no data
HSA+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Pro A10-8700B and 3020e are enumerated here.

AMD-V1no data
IOMMU 2.0+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Pro A10-8700B and 3020e. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3/DDR3L-2133DDR4
Max memory channels2no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R6 GraphicsAMD Radeon RX Vega 3
iGPU core count6no data
Number of pipelines384no data
Enduro+no data
Switchable graphics1no data
UVD+no data
VCE+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Pro A10-8700B and 3020e integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+no data
HDMI+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Pro A10-8700B and 3020e integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan1no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Pro A10-8700B and 3020e.

PCIe version3.0no 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.

Pro A10-8700B 1.43
3020e 1.58
+10.5%

3020e outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 10% based on our aggregate 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%

Pro A10-8700B 2212
3020e 2446
+10.6%

3020e outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 11% 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%

Pro A10-8700B 475
3020e 656
+38.1%

3020e outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 38% 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%

Pro A10-8700B 1008
3020e 1089
+8%

3020e outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 8% in GeekBench 5 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%

Pro A10-8700B 30.7
3020e 29
+5.9%

Pro A10-8700B outperforms 3020e by 6% in wPrime 32.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Pro A10-8700B 192
3020e 196
+2.1%

3020e outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 2% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made 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 (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

Pro A10-8700B 70
3020e 92
+31.4%

3020e outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 31% in Cinebench 15 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%

Pro A10-8700B 0.9
3020e 1.1
+29.4%

3020e outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 29% 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%

Pro A10-8700B 897
3020e 1232
+37.3%

3020e outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 37% in WinRAR 4.0.

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%

Pro A10-8700B 9
3020e 13
+41.1%

3020e outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 41% in x264 encoding pass 2.

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%

Pro A10-8700B 45
3020e 65
+43.8%

3020e outperforms Pro A10-8700B by 44% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.43 1.58
Recency 3 June 2015 4 August 2020
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 6 Watt

The 3020e is our recommended choice as it beats the Pro A10-8700B in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Pro A10-8700B and 3020e, 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 Pro A10-8700B
Pro A10-8700B
AMD 3020e
3020e

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.


3.6 49 votes

Rate Pro A10-8700B on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 775 votes

Rate 3020e on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Pro A10-8700B or 3020e, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.