Phenom X3 8750 vs A6-6310

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A6-6310
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
1.07
+15.1%
Phenom X3 8750
2008
3 cores / 3 threads, 95 Watt
0.93

A6-6310 outperforms Phenom X3 8750 by a moderate 15% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A6-6310 and Phenom X3 8750 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking24192524
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD A-Seriesno data
Power efficiency6.630.91
Architecture codenameBeema (2014)Toliman (2008)
Release date29 April 2014 (10 years ago)April 2008 (16 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A6-6310 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)3 (Tri-Core)
Threads43
Base clock speed1.8 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz2.4 GHz
L1 cacheno data128 KB (per core)
L2 cache2048 KB512 KB (per core)
L3 cacheno data2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm65 nm
Die size107 mm2285 mm2
Number of transistors930 Million450 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A6-6310 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 configurationno data1
SocketFT3bAM2+
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A6-6310 and Phenom X3 8750. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVXno data
AES-NI+-
FMAFMA4-
AVX+-
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
VirusProtect+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A6-6310 and Phenom X3 8750 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A6-6310 and Phenom X3 8750. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1865no data
Max memory channels1no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R4 Graphicsno data
Enduro+-
Switchable graphics+-
UVD+-
VCE+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A6-6310 and Phenom X3 8750 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A6-6310 and Phenom X3 8750 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A6-6310 and Phenom X3 8750.

PCIe version2.0no 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.

A6-6310 1.07
+15.1%
Phenom X3 8750 0.93

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.

A6-6310 1674
+15.8%
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.

A6-6310 229
Phenom X3 8750 301
+31.4%

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.

A6-6310 601
Phenom X3 8750 782
+30.1%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.07 0.93
Physical cores 4 3
Threads 4 3
Chip lithography 28 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 95 Watt

A6-6310 has a 15.1% higher aggregate performance score, 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads, a 132.1% more advanced lithography process, and 533.3% lower power consumption.

The A6-6310 is our recommended choice as it beats the Phenom X3 8750 in performance tests.

Be aware that A6-6310 is a notebook processor while Phenom X3 8750 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A6-6310 and Phenom X3 8750, 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 A6-6310
A6-6310
AMD Phenom X3 8750
Phenom X3 8750

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.


3.5 235 votes

Rate A6-6310 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 70 votes

Rate Phenom X3 8750 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A6-6310 or Phenom X3 8750, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.