GX-210JA vs A8-3870K
Primary details
Comparing A8-3870K and GX-210JA processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2160 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | AMD |
| Power efficiency | 1.39 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Llano (2011−2012) | Temash (2013) |
| Release date | 20 December 2011 (12 years ago) | 23 May 2013 (11 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
A8-3870K and GX-210JA 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 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 3 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 1 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 28 nm |
| Die size | 228 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on A8-3870K and GX-210JA 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 | no data |
| Socket | FM1 | FT3 BGA |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 6 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-3870K and GX-210JA. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | 86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-3870K and GX-210JA are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-3870K and GX-210JA. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon HD 6550D | no 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.
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
| Recency | 20 December 2011 | 23 May 2013 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 6 Watt |
A8-3870K has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
GX-210JA, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 1566.7% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between A8-3870K and GX-210JA. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that A8-3870K is a desktop processor while GX-210JA is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between A8-3870K and GX-210JA, 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.
