A6-3500 vs A10-7700K
Aggregate performance score
A10-7700K outperforms A6-3500 by a whopping 126% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A10-7700K and A6-3500 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1913 | 2534 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.25 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD A-Series (Desktop) | no data |
| Power efficiency | 2.01 | 1.30 |
| Architecture codename | Godaveri (2014−2016) | Llano (2011−2012) |
| Release date | 14 January 2014 (10 years ago) | 17 August 2011 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $152 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
A10-7700K and A6-3500 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) | 3 (Tri-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 3 |
| Base clock speed | 3.5 GHz | 2.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| L1 cache | 256 KB | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 4096 KB | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | 228 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 72 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 1,178 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on A10-7700K and A6-3500 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+ | FM1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A10-7700K and A6-3500. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | SSE1-4a, AVX, AES, FMA4, VT | no data |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| FRTC | + | - |
| FreeSync | + | - |
| DualGraphics | + | - |
| TrueAudio | + | - |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| PowerGating | + | - |
| Out-of-band client management | + | - |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
| HSA | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A10-7700K and A6-3500 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
| IOMMU 2.0 | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-7700K and A6-3500. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3-2133 | DDR3 |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon R7 Graphics | Radeon HD 6530D |
| iGPU core count | 6 | no data |
| Number of pipelines | 384 | no data |
| Enduro | + | - |
| Switchable graphics | + | - |
| UVD | + | - |
| VCE | + | - |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of A10-7700K and A6-3500 integrated GPUs.
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by A10-7700K and A6-3500 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | no data |
| Vulkan | + | - |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A10-7700K and A6-3500.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no 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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.03 | 0.90 |
| Recency | 14 January 2014 | 17 August 2011 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 3 |
| Threads | 4 | 3 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 65 Watt |
A10-7700K has a 125.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads, and a 14.3% more advanced lithography process.
A6-3500, on the other hand, has 46.2% lower power consumption.
The A10-7700K is our recommended choice as it beats the A6-3500 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between A10-7700K and A6-3500, 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.
