E1-6010 vs A4-3300M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A4-3300M
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.75
+121%
E1-6010
2014
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.34

A4-3300M outperforms E1-6010 by a whopping 121% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A4-3300M and E1-6010 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26713081
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-SeriesAMD E-Series
Power efficiency2.033.22
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Beema (2014)
Release date14 June 2011 (13 years ago)29 April 2014 (10 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A4-3300M and E1-6010 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speed1.9 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz1.35 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache1 MB (per core)1024 KB
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography32 nm28 nm
Die size228 mm2107 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data90 °C
Number of transistors1,178 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A4-3300M and E1-6010 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
SocketFS1FT3b
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt10 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A4-3300M and E1-6010. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6480G86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX
AES-NI-+
FMA-FMA4
AVX-+
PowerNow-+
PowerGating-+
VirusProtect-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A4-3300M and E1-6010 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A4-3300M and E1-6010. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 6480G (444 MHz)AMD Radeon R2 Graphics
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A4-3300M and E1-6010 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A4-3300M and E1-6010 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A4-3300M and E1-6010.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data8

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 0.75
+121%
E1-6010 0.34

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.

A4-3300M 1186
+122%
E1-6010 534

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.

A4-3300M 228
+78.1%
E1-6010 128

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.

A4-3300M 392
+79%
E1-6010 219

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.

A4-3300M 1742
+73.2%
E1-6010 1006

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.

A4-3300M 3417
+91.6%
E1-6010 1784

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.

A4-3300M 1556
+67.9%
E1-6010 927

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.

A4-3300M 40.2
+138%
E1-6010 95.8

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.

A4-3300M 1
+89.8%
E1-6010 1

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.75 0.34
Recency 14 June 2011 29 April 2014
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 10 Watt

A4-3300M has a 120.6% higher aggregate performance score.

E1-6010, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 250% lower power consumption.

The A4-3300M is our recommended choice as it beats the E1-6010 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A4-3300M and E1-6010, 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 A4-3300M
A4-3300M
AMD E1-6010
E1-6010

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.


3 111 votes

Rate A4-3300M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.3 562 votes

Rate E1-6010 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A4-3300M or E1-6010, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.