Phenom II X3 N870 vs A8-4500M
Aggregate performance score
Primary details
Comparing A8-4500M and Phenom II X3 N870 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2433 | 2434 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD A-Series | 3x AMD Phenom II |
| Power efficiency | 2.87 | 2.87 |
| Architecture codename | Trinity (2012−2013) | Champlain (2010−2011) |
| Release date | 15 May 2012 (12 years ago) | 16 December 2010 (14 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
A8-4500M and Phenom II X3 N870 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) | 3 (Tri-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 3 |
| Base clock speed | 1.9 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 2.3 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 3600 MHz |
| L1 cache | 192 KB | 384 KB |
| L2 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 1.5 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on A8-4500M and Phenom II X3 N870 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 | FS1r2 | S1 (S1g4) |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-4500M and Phenom II X3 N870. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, FMA | 86x MMX(+), 3DNow!(+), SSE(1,2,3,4A),-64, AMD-V |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-4500M and Phenom II X3 N870 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-4500M and Phenom II X3 N870. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | unknown | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon HD 7640G (496 - 685 MHz) | 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.
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.
Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 15 May 2012 | 16 December 2010 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 3 |
| Threads | 4 | 3 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 45 nm |
A8-4500M has an age advantage of 1 year, 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads, and a 40.6% more advanced lithography process.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A8-4500M and Phenom II X3 N870.
Should you still have questions on choice between A8-4500M and Phenom II X3 N870, 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.
