Athlon Silver 3050U vs PRO A10-8770

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

PRO A10-8770
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
2.25
+19.7%
Athlon Silver 3050U
2020
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
1.88

PRO A10-8770 outperforms Athlon Silver 3050U by a significant 20% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing PRO A10-8770 and Athlon Silver 3050U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking18291983
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD Picasso (Ryzen 3000 APU)
Power efficiency3.2611.80
Architecture codenameCarrizo (2015−2018)Dali (Zen) (2020)
Release dateOctober 2016 (8 years ago)6 January 2020 (4 years ago)

Detailed specifications

PRO A10-8770 and Athlon Silver 3050U 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed3.5 GHz2.3 GHz
Boost clock speed3.8 GHz3.2 GHz
Multiplierno data23
L1 cacheno data192 KB
L2 cache2048 KB1 MB
L3 cacheno data4 MB
Chip lithography28 nm14 nm
Die size250 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data95 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors3,100 million4500 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibilityno data+

Compatibility

Information on PRO A10-8770 and Athlon Silver 3050U 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 configuration1no data
SocketAM4FP5
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by PRO A10-8770 and Athlon Silver 3050U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI++
FMA++
AVX++
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by PRO A10-8770 and Athlon Silver 3050U are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by PRO A10-8770 and Athlon Silver 3050U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2400DDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidthno data38.397 GB/s
ECC memory support-+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R7 GraphicsAMD Radeon RX Vega 2 ( - 1100 MHz)
iGPU core count6no data
Switchable graphics+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of PRO A10-8770 and Athlon Silver 3050U integrated GPUs.

DisplayPortn/a-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by PRO A10-8770 and Athlon Silver 3050U integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by PRO A10-8770 and Athlon Silver 3050U.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanesno data12

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.

PRO A10-8770 2.25
+19.7%
Athlon Silver 3050U 1.88

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.

PRO A10-8770 3574
+19.7%
Athlon Silver 3050U 2986

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.25 1.88
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 15 Watt

PRO A10-8770 has a 19.7% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Athlon Silver 3050U, on the other hand, has a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 333.3% lower power consumption.

The PRO A10-8770 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon Silver 3050U in performance tests.

Note that PRO A10-8770 is a desktop processor while Athlon Silver 3050U is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between PRO A10-8770 and Athlon Silver 3050U, 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 PRO A10-8770
PRO A10-8770
AMD Athlon Silver 3050U
Athlon Silver 3050U

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.


3.3 115 votes

Rate PRO A10-8770 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.1 8046 votes

Rate Athlon Silver 3050U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about PRO A10-8770 or Athlon Silver 3050U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.