i5-4400E vs A6-3400M
Aggregate performance score
Core i5-4400E outperforms A6-3400M by a whopping 175% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A6-3400M and Core i5-4400E processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2650 | 1895 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD A-Series | Intel Core i5 |
| Power efficiency | 2.02 | 5.25 |
| Architecture codename | Llano (2011−2012) | Haswell (2013−2015) |
| Release date | 14 June 2011 (13 years ago) | 1 October 2013 (11 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $266 |
Detailed specifications
A6-3400M and Core i5-4400E 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 1.4 GHz | 2.7 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.3 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 3 MB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | 228 mm2 | 130 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 960 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on A6-3400M and Core i5-4400E 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 | no data |
| Socket | FS1 | FCBGA1364 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 37 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-3400M and Core i5-4400E. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6480G | no data |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-3400M and Core i5-4400E are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-3400M and Core i5-4400E. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon HD 6520G | Intel HD Graphics 4600 |
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 | 0.76 | 2.09 |
| Integrated graphics card | 0.78 | 1.84 |
| Recency | 14 June 2011 | 1 October 2013 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 37 Watt |
A6-3400M has 100% more physical cores, and 5.7% lower power consumption.
i5-4400E, on the other hand, has a 175% higher aggregate performance score, 135.9% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 2 years, and a 45.5% more advanced lithography process.
The Core i5-4400E is our recommended choice as it beats the A6-3400M in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between A6-3400M and Core i5-4400E, 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.
