A8-3500M vs Core 2 Duo E8300

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core 2 Duo E8300
2008
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.64
A8-3500M
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
0.90
+40.6%

A8-3500M outperforms Core 2 Duo E8300 by a considerable 41% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core 2 Duo E8300 and A8-3500M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking27672544
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD A-Series
Power efficiency0.912.39
Architecture codenameWolfdale (2008−2010)Llano (2011−2012)
Release dateApril 2008 (16 years ago)14 June 2011 (13 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Core 2 Duo E8300 and A8-3500M 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 cores2 (Dual-core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed2.83 GHz1.5 GHz
Boost clock speed2.83 GHz2.4 GHz
Bus rate1333 MHzno data
L1 cache64K (per core)128 KB (per core)
L2 cache6 MB (shared)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm32 nm
Die size107 mm2228 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °Cno data
Number of transistors410 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Core 2 Duo E8300 and A8-3500M 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
SocketLGA775FS1
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 2 Duo E8300 and A8-3500M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno data3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6620G
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Demand Based Switching-no data
FSB parity-no data

Security technologies

Core 2 Duo E8300 and A8-3500M technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 2 Duo E8300 and A8-3500M are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 2 Duo E8300 and A8-3500M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon HD 6620G

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.

Core 2 Duo E8300 0.64
A8-3500M 0.90
+40.6%

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.

Core 2 Duo E8300 997
A8-3500M 1400
+40.4%

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.

Core 2 Duo E8300 336
+45.5%
A8-3500M 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.

Core 2 Duo E8300 575
A8-3500M 620
+7.8%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.64 0.90
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 45 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 35 Watt

A8-3500M has a 40.6% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 40.6% more advanced lithography process, and 85.7% lower power consumption.

The A8-3500M is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Duo E8300 in performance tests.

Note that Core 2 Duo E8300 is a desktop processor while A8-3500M is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core 2 Duo E8300 and A8-3500M, 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.


Intel Core 2 Duo E8300
Core 2 Duo E8300
AMD A8-3500M
A8-3500M

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 66 votes

Rate Core 2 Duo E8300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 118 votes

Rate A8-3500M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core 2 Duo E8300 or A8-3500M, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.