Phenom X3 8750 vs A6-3600

Place in the ranking	2414	2526
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Market segment	Desktop processor	Desktop processor
Power efficiency	1.56	0.91
Architecture codename	Llano (2011−2012)	Toliman (2008)
Release date	30 June 2011 (13 years ago)	April 2008 (16 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A6-3600 and Phenom X3 8750 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)	3 (Tri-Core)
Threads	4	3
Base clock speed	2.1 GHz	no data
Boost clock speed	2.4 GHz	2.4 GHz
L1 cache	128 KB (per core)	128 KB (per core)
L2 cache	1 MB (per core)	512 KB (per core)
L3 cache	0 KB	2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography	32 nm	65 nm
Die size	228 mm²	285 mm²
Number of transistors	1,178 million	450 million
64 bit support	+	+
Windows 11 compatibility	-	-

Compatibility

Information on A6-3600 and Phenom X3 8750 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
Socket	FM1	AM2+
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	95 Watt

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-3600 and Phenom X3 8750 are enumerated here.

AMD-V

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-3600 and Phenom X3 8750. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory types

DDR3

no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card

Radeon HD 6530D

no data

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.

A6-3600 1.07
+17.6%

Phenom X3 8750 0.91

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.

A6-3600 1697
+17.4%

Phenom X3 8750 1445

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.

A6-3600 272

Phenom X3 8750 301
+10.7%

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.

A6-3600 836
+6.9%

Phenom X3 8750 782

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary

Performance score	1.07	0.91
Physical cores	4	3
Threads	4	3
Chip lithography	32 nm	65 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	65 Watt	95 Watt

A6-3600 has a 17.6% higher aggregate performance score, 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads, a 103.1% more advanced lithography process, and 46.2% lower power consumption.

The A6-3600 is our recommended choice as it beats the Phenom X3 8750 in performance tests.

Should you still have questions on choice between A6-3600 and Phenom X3 8750, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.