E2-3000M vs A8-3850

VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-3850
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 100 Watt
1.49
+255%
E2-3000M
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.42

A8-3850 outperforms E2-3000M by a whopping 255% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A8-3850 and E2-3000M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking21542981
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesA-Series (Desktop)AMD E-Series
Power efficiency1.401.13
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Llano (2011−2012)
Release date30 June 2011 (13 years ago)20 December 2011 (12 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A8-3850 and E2-3000M 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed2.9 GHz1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed2.9 GHz2.4 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)128 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per core)512K (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 A8-3850 and E2-3000M 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
SocketFM1FS1
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-3850 and E2-3000M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataSSE4.1/2, 3DNow, Radeon HD 6380G

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-3850 and E2-3000M are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-3850 and E2-3000M. 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 6550DAMD Radeon HD 6380G

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.

A8-3850 1.49
+255%
E2-3000M 0.42

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.

A8-3850 2374
+255%
E2-3000M 668

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.

A8-3850 315
+36.4%
E2-3000M 231

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.

A8-3850 932
+119%
E2-3000M 426

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.

A8-3850 2649
+65.9%
E2-3000M 1597

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.

A8-3850 9534
+216%
E2-3000M 3014

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.49 0.42
Integrated graphics card 1.04 0.52
Recency 30 June 2011 20 December 2011
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 35 Watt

A8-3850 has a 254.8% higher aggregate performance score, 100% faster integrated GPU, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

E2-3000M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 5 months, and 185.7% lower power consumption.

The A8-3850 is our recommended choice as it beats the E2-3000M in performance tests.

Note that A8-3850 is a desktop processor while E2-3000M is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A8-3850 and E2-3000M, 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 A8-3850
A8-3850
AMD E2-3000M
E2-3000M

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.


3.8 176 votes

Rate A8-3850 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 54 votes

Rate E2-3000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A8-3850 or E2-3000M, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.