A6-3500 vs A8-6410

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-6410
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
1.12
+25.8%
A6-3500
2011
3 cores / 3 threads, 65 Watt
0.89

A8-6410 outperforms A6-3500 by a significant 26% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A8-6410 and A6-3500 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking24062548
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD A-Seriesno data
Power efficiency7.031.29
Architecture codenameBeema (2014)Llano (2011−2012)
Release date1 June 2014 (10 years ago)17 August 2011 (13 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A8-6410 and A6-3500 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)3 (Tri-Core)
Threads43
Base clock speed2 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz2.4 GHz
L1 cacheno data128 KB (per core)
L2 cache2048 KB1 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography28 nm32 nm
Die sizeno data228 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Number of transistors930 Million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on A8-6410 and A6-3500 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 configurationno data1
SocketFT3bFM1
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-6410 and A6-3500. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX, SSE4.2, AES, AVX, BMI1, F16C, AMD64, VTno data
AES-NI+-
FMAFMA4-
AVX+-
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
VirusProtect+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-6410 and A6-3500 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-6410 and A6-3500. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3L-1866DDR3
Max memory channels1no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R5 GraphicsRadeon HD 6530D
Enduro+-
Switchable graphics+-
UVD+-
VCE+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A8-6410 and A6-3500 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A8-6410 and A6-3500 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A8-6410 and A6-3500.

PCIe version2.0no 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.

A8-6410 1.12
+25.8%
A6-3500 0.89

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.

A8-6410 1772
+24.8%
A6-3500 1420

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.

A8-6410 223
A6-3500 262
+17.5%

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.

A8-6410 589
A6-3500 628
+6.6%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.12 0.89
Recency 1 June 2014 17 August 2011
Physical cores 4 3
Threads 4 3
Chip lithography 28 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 65 Watt

A8-6410 has a 25.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 333.3% lower power consumption.

The A8-6410 is our recommended choice as it beats the A6-3500 in performance tests.

Be aware that A8-6410 is a notebook processor while A6-3500 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A8-6410 and A6-3500, 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 A8-6410
A8-6410
AMD A6-3500
A6-3500

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.


3.6 323 votes

Rate A8-6410 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 128 votes

Rate A6-3500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A8-6410 or A6-3500, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.