Phenom X3 8750 vs A8-3500M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-3500M
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
0.88
Phenom X3 8750
2008
3 cores / 3 threads, 95 Watt
0.91
+3.4%

Phenom X3 8750 outperforms A8-3500M by a minimal 3% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A8-3500M and Phenom X3 8750 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25442524
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD A-Seriesno data
Power efficiency2.380.91
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Toliman (2008)
Release date14 June 2011 (13 years ago)April 2008 (16 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A8-3500M 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 speed1.5 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz2.4 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)128 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)512 KB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm65 nm
Die size228 mm2285 mm2
Number of transistors1,178 million450 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A8-3500M 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 configuration11
SocketFS1AM2+
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-3500M and Phenom X3 8750. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6620Gno data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-3500M and Phenom X3 8750 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-3500M and Phenom X3 8750. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon HD 6620Gno 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.

A8-3500M 0.88
Phenom X3 8750 0.91
+3.4%

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
Phenom X3 8750 1445
+3.2%

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
Phenom X3 8750 301
+30.3%

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
Phenom X3 8750 782
+26.1%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.88 0.91
Physical cores 4 3
Threads 4 3
Chip lithography 32 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 95 Watt

A8-3500M has 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads, a 103.1% more advanced lithography process, and 171.4% lower power consumption.

Phenom X3 8750, on the other hand, has a 3.4% higher aggregate performance score.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A8-3500M and Phenom X3 8750.

Be aware that A8-3500M is a notebook processor while Phenom X3 8750 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A8-3500M 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 A8-3500M
A8-3500M
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.


3.6 118 votes

Rate A8-3500M 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 A8-3500M or Phenom X3 8750, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.