i7-2610UE vs A8-3520M
Aggregate performance score
A8-3520M outperforms Core i7-2610UE by a minimal 2% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A8-3520M and Core i7-2610UE processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2524 | 2540 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.02 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD A-Series | Intel Core i7 |
| Power efficiency | 2.46 | 4.95 |
| Architecture codename | Llano (2011−2012) | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) |
| Release date | 20 December 2011 (12 years ago) | no data (2024 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $317 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
A8-3520M and Core i7-2610UE 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 1.6 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2.5 GHz | 1.5 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 2.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 5 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 15 |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 4 MB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 228 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 624 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on A8-3520M and Core i7-2610UE 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 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | FS1 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 17 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-3520M and Core i7-2610UE. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6620G | no data |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| FMA | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Security technologies
A8-3520M and Core i7-2610UE technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-3520M and Core i7-2610UE are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-3520M and Core i7-2610UE. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3-1333 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 16 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 21.335 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon HD 6620G | Intel HD Graphics 3000 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.91 | 0.89 |
| Integrated graphics card | 0.88 | 0.66 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 17 Watt |
A8-3520M has a 2.2% higher aggregate performance score, 33.3% faster integrated GPU, and 100% more physical cores.
i7-2610UE, on the other hand, has 105.9% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A8-3520M and Core i7-2610UE.
Should you still have questions on choice between A8-3520M and Core i7-2610UE, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
