A4-5000 vs A8-3500M

VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-3500M
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
0.88
+8.6%
A4-5000
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
0.81

A8-3500M outperforms A4-5000 by a small 9% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A8-3500M and A4-5000 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25462590
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-SeriesAMD A-Series
Power efficiency2.385.11
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Kabini (2013−2014)
Release date14 June 2011 (13 years ago)23 May 2013 (11 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A8-3500M and A4-5000 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 speed1.5 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz1.5 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache1 MB (per core)2048 KB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm28 nm
Die size228 mm2246 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data90 °C
Number of transistors1,178 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A8-3500M and A4-5000 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
SocketFS1FT3
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-3500M and A4-5000. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6620G86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX
AES-NI-+
FMA-FMA4
AVX-+
PowerNow-+
PowerGating-+
VirusProtect-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-3500M and A4-5000 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-3500M and A4-5000. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 6620GAMD Radeon HD 8330
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A8-3500M and A4-5000 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A8-3500M and A4-5000 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A8-3500M and A4-5000.

PCIe versionno data2.0

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.

A8-3500M 0.88
+8.6%
A4-5000 0.81

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.

A8-3500M 1400
+8.6%
A4-5000 1289

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.

A8-3500M 231
+47.1%
A4-5000 157

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.

A8-3500M 620
+33.3%
A4-5000 465

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

A8-3500M 1586
+31.5%
A4-5000 1207

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

A8-3500M 5170
+24.1%
A4-5000 4165

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

A8-3500M 2256
+10.6%
A4-5000 2039

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

A8-3500M 24.09
+58.6%
A4-5000 38.2

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

A8-3500M 2
+27%
A4-5000 1

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.88 0.81
Integrated graphics card 0.88 0.69
Recency 14 June 2011 23 May 2013
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 15 Watt

A8-3500M has a 8.6% higher aggregate performance score, and 27.5% faster integrated GPU.

A4-5000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A8-3500M and A4-5000.


Should you still have questions on choice between A8-3500M and A4-5000, 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 A8-3500M
A8-3500M
AMD A4-5000
A4-5000

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.


3.6 118 votes

Rate A8-3500M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 371 vote

Rate A4-5000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A8-3500M or A4-5000, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.