Athlon 800 vs A10-6700
Primary details
Comparing A10-6700 and Athlon 800 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1933 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | 2.85 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Richland (2013−2014) | Thunderbird (1999−2000) |
| Release date | 1 June 2013 (11 years ago) | 20 December 1999 (24 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $799 |
Detailed specifications
A10-6700 and Athlon 800 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 3.7 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 4.3 GHz | 0.8 GHz |
| L1 cache | 192 KB | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 4096 KB | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 180 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | 102 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 71 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 71 °C | 70 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 22 million |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on A10-6700 and Athlon 800 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 | FM2 | A |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 43 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A10-6700 and Athlon 800. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | - |
| FMA | FMA4 | - |
| AVX | AVX | - |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| PowerGating | + | - |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A10-6700 and Athlon 800 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| IOMMU 2.0 | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-6700 and Athlon 800. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3-1866 | DDR1 |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon HD 8670D | N/A |
| Number of pipelines | 384 | no data |
| Enduro | + | - |
| Switchable graphics | + | - |
| UVD | + | - |
| VCE | + | - |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of A10-6700 and Athlon 800 integrated GPUs.
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by A10-6700 and Athlon 800 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | DirectX® 11 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A10-6700 and Athlon 800.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 June 2013 | 20 December 1999 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 1 |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 180 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 43 Watt |
A10-6700 has an age advantage of 13 years, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 462.5% more advanced lithography process.
Athlon 800, on the other hand, has 51.2% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between A10-6700 and Athlon 800. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between A10-6700 and Athlon 800, 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.
