A6-3400M vs A8-3510MX

VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-3510MX
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 45 Watt
1.03
+37.3%
A6-3400M
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
0.75

A8-3510MX outperforms A6-3400M by a substantial 37% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A8-3510MX and A6-3400M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking24532663
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-SeriesAMD A-Series
Power efficiency2.152.02
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Llano (2011−2012)
Release date14 June 2011 (13 years ago)14 June 2011 (13 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A8-3510MX and A6-3400M 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 speed1.8 GHz1.4 GHz
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz2.3 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)128 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size228 mm2228 mm2
Number of transistors1,178 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A8-3510MX and A6-3400M 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
SocketFS1FS1
Power consumption (TDP)45 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-3510MX and A6-3400M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6620G3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6480G

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-3510MX and A6-3400M are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-3510MX and A6-3400M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 6620G (444 MHz)AMD Radeon HD 6520G (400 MHz)

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.

A8-3510MX 1.03
+37.3%
A6-3400M 0.75

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.

A8-3510MX 1631
+36.7%
A6-3400M 1193

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.

A8-3510MX 233
+10.4%
A6-3400M 211

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.

A8-3510MX 631
+20.9%
A6-3400M 522

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.

A8-3510MX 6158
+25.1%
A6-3400M 4922

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.03 0.75
Integrated graphics card 0.88 0.78
Power consumption (TDP) 45 Watt 35 Watt

A8-3510MX has a 37.3% higher aggregate performance score, and 12.8% faster integrated GPU.

A6-3400M, on the other hand, has 28.6% lower power consumption.

The A8-3510MX is our recommended choice as it beats the A6-3400M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A8-3510MX and A6-3400M, 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 A8-3510MX
A8-3510MX
AMD A6-3400M
A6-3400M

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.


4.2 42 votes

Rate A8-3510MX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 172 votes

Rate A6-3400M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A8-3510MX or A6-3400M, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.