i7-660UM vs A6-3400M

VS

Aggregate performance score

A6-3400M
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
0.75
Core i7-660UM
2010
2 cores / 4 threads, 18 Watt
0.81
+8%

Core i7-660UM outperforms A6-3400M by a small 8% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A6-3400M and Core i7-660UM processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26532591
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-SeriesIntel Core i7
Power efficiency2.034.26
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Arrandale (2010−2011)
Release date14 June 2011 (13 years ago)24 May 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$317

Detailed specifications

A6-3400M and Core i7-660UM 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads44
Base clock speed1.4 GHz1.33 GHz
Boost clock speed2.3 GHz2.4 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 1.0
Bus rateno data1 × 2.5 GT/s
Multiplierno data10
L1 cache128 KB (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)256 KB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size228 mm281+144 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Number of transistors1,178 million382+177 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A6-3400M and Core i7-660UM 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 (Uniprocessor)
SocketFS1BGA1288
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt18 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-3400M and Core i7-660UM. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6480GIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
AES-NI-+
FMA-+
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data+
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
PAEno data36 Bit
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+

Security technologies

A6-3400M and Core i7-660UM technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-3400M and Core i7-660UM are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-3400M and Core i7-660UM. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3-800
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data12.799 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 6520G (400 MHz)Intel HD Graphics for Previous Generation Intel Processors
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data500 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A6-3400M and Core i7-660UM integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A6-3400M and Core i7-660UM.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

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
i7-660UM 0.81
+8%

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
i7-660UM 1284
+7.8%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.75 0.81
Integrated graphics card 0.78 0.77
Recency 14 June 2011 24 May 2010
Physical cores 4 2
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 18 Watt

A6-3400M has 1.3% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 1 year, and 100% more physical cores.

i7-660UM, on the other hand, has a 8% higher aggregate performance score, and 94.4% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A6-3400M and Core i7-660UM.


Should you still have questions on choice between A6-3400M and Core i7-660UM, 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
Intel Core i7-660UM
Core i7-660UM

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

No user ratings yet.

Rate Core i7-660UM on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A6-3400M or Core i7-660UM, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.