A8-3520M vs i7-4860EQ
Aggregate performance score
Core i7-4860EQ outperforms A8-3520M by a whopping 278% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i7-4860EQ and A8-3520M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1534 | 2519 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Core i7 | AMD A-Series |
| Power efficiency | 6.97 | 2.48 |
| Architecture codename | Crystalwell (2013−2014) | Llano (2011−2012) |
| Release date | 20 February 2014 (10 years ago) | 20 December 2011 (12 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Core i7-4860EQ and A8-3520M 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) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 1.8 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.8 GHz | 2.5 GHz |
| Bus type | DMI 2.0 | no data |
| Bus rate | 5 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 32 | no data |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 6 MB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 264 mm2 | 228 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,400 million | 1,178 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Core i7-4860EQ and A8-3520M 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 |
| Socket | Intel BGA1364 | FS1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 47 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-4860EQ and A8-3520M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | 3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6620G |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| TSX | + | - |
Security technologies
Core i7-4860EQ and A8-3520M technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-4860EQ and A8-3520M are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-4860EQ and A8-3520M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | 32 GB | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD 5200 | AMD 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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.59 | 0.95 |
| Recency | 20 February 2014 | 20 December 2011 |
| Threads | 8 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 47 Watt | 35 Watt |
i7-4860EQ has a 277.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, 100% more threads, and a 45.5% more advanced lithography process.
A8-3520M, on the other hand, has 34.3% lower power consumption.
The Core i7-4860EQ is our recommended choice as it beats the A8-3520M in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-4860EQ and A8-3520M, 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.
