Atom x5-E8000 vs A4-3300M
Aggregate performance score
A4-3300M outperforms Atom x5-E8000 by a significant 26% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A4-3300M and Atom x5-E8000 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2546 | 2687 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD A-Series | 5x Intel Atom |
| Architecture codename | Llano (2011−2012) | Cherry Trail (2016) |
| Release date | 14 June 2011 (13 years ago) | 8 February 2016 (8 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $39 |
| Current price | $61 | $340 (8.7x MSRP) |
Detailed specifications
A4-3300M and Atom x5-E8000 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 1.9 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 1.04 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 2 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 228 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on A4-3300M and Atom x5-E8000 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 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | FS1 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A4-3300M and Atom x5-E8000. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, DDR3 Memory Controller, Radeon HD 6480G | no data |
| AES-NI | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A4-3300M and Atom x5-E8000 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A4-3300M and Atom x5-E8000. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 8 GB |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon HD 6480G | Intel HD Graphics |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A4-3300M and Atom x5-E8000.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 4 |
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.
A4-3300M outperforms Atom x5-E8000 by 26% 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%
A4-3300M outperforms Atom x5-E8000 by 26% 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%
A4-3300M outperforms Atom x5-E8000 by 25% 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%
Atom x5-E8000 outperforms A4-3300M by 50% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 20%
A4-3300M outperforms Atom x5-E8000 by 91% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
A4-3300M outperforms Atom x5-E8000 by 6% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Atom x5-E8000 outperforms A4-3300M by 10% in 3DMark06 CPU.
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%
A4-3300M outperforms Atom x5-E8000 by 16% in wPrime 32.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.77 | 0.61 |
| Recency | 14 June 2011 | 8 February 2016 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 5 Watt |
The A4-3300M is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom x5-E8000 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between A4-3300M and Atom x5-E8000, 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.
