E2-3000M vs A8-5557M

VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-5557M
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
1.13
+169%
E2-3000M
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.42

A8-5557M outperforms E2-3000M by a whopping 169% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A8-5557M and E2-3000M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking23952986
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD A-SeriesAMD E-Series
Power efficiency3.041.13
Architecture codenameRichland (2013−2014)Llano (2011−2012)
Release date1 June 2013 (11 years ago)20 December 2011 (13 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A8-5557M 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 speed2.1 GHz1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed3.1 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 size246 mm2228 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)71 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,178 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A8-5557M 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
SocketFP2FS1
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-5557M and E2-3000M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, FMASSE4.1/2, 3DNow, Radeon HD 6380G
AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-5557M and E2-3000M are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-5557M 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 8550G (554 - 720 MHz)AMD 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.

A8-5557M 1.13
+169%
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.

A8-5557M 1801
+170%
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.

A8-5557M 363
+57.1%
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.

A8-5557M 1011
+137%
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.

A8-5557M 2115
+32.4%
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.

A8-5557M 5259
+74.5%
E2-3000M 3014

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.13 0.42
Integrated graphics card 1.07 0.52
Recency 1 June 2013 20 December 2011
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2

A8-5557M has a 169% higher aggregate performance score, 105.8% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 1 year, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

The A8-5557M is our recommended choice as it beats the E2-3000M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A8-5557M 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 A8-5557M
A8-5557M
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 27 votes

Rate A8-5557M 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 A8-5557M or E2-3000M, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.