Athlon 200GE vs A8-6600K
Aggregate performance score
Athlon 200GE outperforms A8-6600K by a substantial 37% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A8-6600K and Athlon 200GE processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1966 | 1723 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.23 | 4.27 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD A-Series (Desktop) | AMD Athlon |
| Power efficiency | 1.79 | 7.00 |
| Architecture codename | Richland (2013−2014) | Zen (2017−2020) |
| Release date | 1 June 2013 (11 years ago) | 1 June 2018 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $142 | $55 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Athlon 200GE has 1757% better value for money than A8-6600K.
Detailed specifications
A8-6600K and Athlon 200GE 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 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 3.9 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.2 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| Multiplier | no data | 32 |
| L1 cache | 192 KB | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 4096 KB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 4 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | 209.78 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 74 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 4,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on A8-6600K and Athlon 200GE 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 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | FM2 | AM4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-6600K and Athlon 200GE. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | FMA4 | + |
| AVX | AVX | + |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| PowerGating | + | - |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-6600K and Athlon 200GE are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
| IOMMU 2.0 | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-6600K and Athlon 200GE. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3-1866 | DDR4 Dual-channel |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 42.671 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon HD 8570D | AMD Radeon RX Vega 3 |
| Number of pipelines | 256 | no data |
| Enduro | + | - |
| Switchable graphics | + | - |
| UVD | + | - |
| VCE | + | - |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of A8-6600K and Athlon 200GE integrated GPUs.
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by A8-6600K and Athlon 200GE integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | DirectX® 11 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A8-6600K and Athlon 200GE.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 12 |
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.
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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.89 | 2.59 |
| Integrated graphics card | 1.12 | 2.98 |
| Recency | 1 June 2013 | 1 June 2018 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 35 Watt |
A8-6600K has 100% more physical cores.
Athlon 200GE, on the other hand, has a 37% higher aggregate performance score, 166.1% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 5 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 185.7% lower power consumption.
The Athlon 200GE is our recommended choice as it beats the A8-6600K in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between A8-6600K and Athlon 200GE, 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.
