A10-5750M vs A10-6800K

VS

Aggregate performance score

A10-6800K
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 100 Watt
2.01
+46.7%
A10-5750M
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
1.37

A10-6800K outperforms A10-5750M by a considerable 47% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A10-6800K and A10-5750M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking19202229
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.33no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesAMD A-Series (Desktop)AMD A-Series
Power efficiency1.903.70
Architecture codenameRichland (2013−2014)Richland (2013−2014)
Release date1 June 2013 (11 years ago)1 June 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$142no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

A10-6800K and A10-5750M 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 speed4.1 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed4.4 GHz3.5 GHz
L1 cache192 KB128 KB (per core)
L2 cache4096 KB1 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size246 mm2246 mm2
Maximum core temperature74 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °C71 °C
Number of transistors1,303 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on A10-6800K and A10-5750M 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 configuration11
SocketFM2FS1r2
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A10-6800K and A10-5750M. 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++
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
VirusProtect+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A10-6800K and A10-5750M are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-6800K and A10-5750M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-2133DDR3
Max memory channels2no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 8670DAMD Radeon HD 8650G (533 - 720 MHz)
Number of pipelines384no data
Enduro+-
Switchable graphics+-
UVD+-
VCE+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A10-6800K and A10-5750M integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A10-6800K and A10-5750M integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 11no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A10-6800K and A10-5750M.

PCIe version2.0no 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.

A10-6800K 2.01
+46.7%
A10-5750M 1.37

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.

A10-6800K 3186
+46.6%
A10-5750M 2174

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.

A10-6800K 483
+63.7%
A10-5750M 295

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.

A10-6800K 1146
+73.6%
A10-5750M 660

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.

A10-6800K 3428
+32.9%
A10-5750M 2579

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.

A10-6800K 10077
+56.2%
A10-5750M 6451

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.

A10-6800K 4885
+50.9%
A10-5750M 3238

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.

A10-6800K 16.1
+39.8%
A10-5750M 22.5

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.

A10-6800K 4
+56.3%
A10-5750M 2

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

A10-6800K 326
+56%
A10-5750M 209

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.

A10-6800K 100
+31.6%
A10-5750M 76

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.

A10-6800K 1.14
+34.1%
A10-5750M 0.85

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.  

A10-6800K 23
+55.3%
A10-5750M 15

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.  

A10-6800K 111
+46.1%
A10-5750M 76

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

A10-6800K 6774
+41.5%
A10-5750M 4787

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

A10-6800K 2340
+28.9%
A10-5750M 1816

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.01 1.37
Integrated graphics card 1.38 1.36
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 35 Watt

A10-6800K has a 46.7% higher aggregate performance score, and 1.5% faster integrated GPU.

A10-5750M, on the other hand, has 185.7% lower power consumption.

The A10-6800K is our recommended choice as it beats the A10-5750M in performance tests.

Note that A10-6800K is a desktop processor while A10-5750M is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A10-6800K and A10-5750M, 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 A10-6800K
A10-6800K
AMD A10-5750M
A10-5750M

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.


4 437 votes

Rate A10-6800K on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 252 votes

Rate A10-5750M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A10-6800K or A10-5750M, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.