Athlon Silver 7120U vs PRO A10-8750B
Aggregate performance score
Athlon Silver 7120U outperforms PRO A10-8750B by a small 7% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing PRO A10-8750B and Athlon Silver 7120U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1981 | 1920 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Power efficiency | 1.84 | 12.46 |
| Architecture codename | Godaveri (2014−2016) | Mendocino (Zen 2) (2022−2023) |
| Release date | 29 September 2015 (9 years ago) | 20 September 2022 (2 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
PRO A10-8750B and Athlon Silver 7120U 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 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 3.6 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 4096 KB | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 2 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 6 nm |
| Die size | 245 mm2 | 100 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 71 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 72 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 2,411 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on PRO A10-8750B and Athlon Silver 7120U 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 | FM2+ | FP6 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by PRO A10-8750B and Athlon Silver 7120U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | XFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMT |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | + |
| FRTC | + | - |
| FreeSync | + | - |
| PowerTune | + | - |
| DualGraphics | + | - |
| TrueAudio | + | - |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| PowerGating | + | - |
| Out-of-band client management | + | - |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
| RAID | + | - |
| HSA | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by PRO A10-8750B and Athlon Silver 7120U are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
| IOMMU 2.0 | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by PRO A10-8750B and Athlon Silver 7120U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3-2133 | DDR5 Dual-channel |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon R7 Graphics | AMD Radeon 610M |
| iGPU core count | 8 | no data |
| Number of pipelines | 512 | no data |
| Enduro | + | - |
| Switchable graphics | + | - |
| UVD | + | - |
| VCE | + | - |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of PRO A10-8750B and Athlon Silver 7120U integrated GPUs.
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by PRO A10-8750B and Athlon Silver 7120U integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | no data |
| Vulkan | + | - |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by PRO A10-8750B and Athlon Silver 7120U.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 4 |
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 | 1.92 | 2.05 |
| Recency | 29 September 2015 | 20 September 2022 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 6 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 15 Watt |
PRO A10-8750B has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
Athlon Silver 7120U, on the other hand, has a 6.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 366.7% more advanced lithography process, and 533.3% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between PRO A10-8750B and Athlon Silver 7120U.
Note that PRO A10-8750B is a desktop processor while Athlon Silver 7120U is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between PRO A10-8750B and Athlon Silver 7120U, 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.
