A8-3530MX vs A6-3400M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A6-3400M
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
0.75
A8-3530MX
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 45 Watt
1.01
+34.7%

A8-3530MX outperforms A6-3400M by a substantial 35% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A6-3400M and A8-3530MX processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26532449
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-SeriesAMD A-Series
Power efficiency2.032.12
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Llano (2011−2012)
Release date14 June 2011 (13 years ago)14 June 2011 (13 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A6-3400M and A8-3530MX 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 speed1.4 GHz1.9 GHz
Boost clock speed2.3 GHz2.6 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)128 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size228 mm2228 mm2
Number of transistors1,178 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A6-3400M and A8-3530MX 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
SocketFS1FS1
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt45 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-3400M and A8-3530MX. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6480G3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6620G

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-3400M and A8-3530MX are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-3400M and A8-3530MX. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 6520G (400 MHz)AMD Radeon HD 6620G (444 MHz)

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.

A6-3400M 0.75
A8-3530MX 1.01
+34.7%

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.

A6-3400M 1191
A8-3530MX 1608
+35%

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.

A6-3400M 211
A8-3530MX 299
+41.7%

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.

A6-3400M 522
A8-3530MX 967
+85.2%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.75 1.01
Integrated graphics card 0.78 0.88
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 45 Watt

A6-3400M has 28.6% lower power consumption.

A8-3530MX, on the other hand, has a 34.7% higher aggregate performance score, and 12.8% faster integrated GPU.

The A8-3530MX is our recommended choice as it beats the A6-3400M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A6-3400M and A8-3530MX, 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 A6-3400M
A6-3400M
AMD A8-3530MX
A8-3530MX

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.


3.6 172 votes

Rate A6-3400M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 66 votes

Rate A8-3530MX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A6-3400M or A8-3530MX, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.