A6-3400M vs Pro A12-8800B

VS

Aggregate performance score

Pro A12-8800B
2015
4 cores / 4 threads, 12 Watt
1.62
+116%
A6-3400M
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
0.75

Pro A12-8800B outperforms A6-3400M by a whopping 116% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Pro A12-8800B and A6-3400M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking20822653
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD CarrizoAMD A-Series
Power efficiency4.382.03
Architecture codenameCarrizo (2015−2018)Llano (2011−2012)
Release date3 June 2015 (9 years ago)14 June 2011 (13 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Pro A12-8800B and A6-3400M 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed2.1 GHz1.4 GHz
Boost clock speed3.4 GHz2.3 GHz
L1 cacheno data128 KB (per core)
L2 cache2048 KB1 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography28 nm32 nm
Die sizeno data228 mm2
Number of transistors3100 Million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Pro A12-8800B and A6-3400M 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 configurationno data1
SocketFP4FS1
Power consumption (TDP)12-35 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Pro A12-8800B and A6-3400M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsHSA 1.03DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6480G
AES-NI+-
FMAFMA4-
AVXAVX-
FreeSync+-
TrueAudio+-
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
Out-of-band client management+-
VirusProtect+-
RAID+-
HSA+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Pro A12-8800B and A6-3400M are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Pro A12-8800B and A6-3400M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3/DDR3L-2133DDR3
Max memory channels2no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R7 GraphicsAMD Radeon HD 6520G (400 MHz)
iGPU core count8no data
Number of pipelines512no data
Enduro+-
Switchable graphics+-
UVD+-
VCE+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Pro A12-8800B and A6-3400M integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Pro A12-8800B and A6-3400M integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Pro A12-8800B and A6-3400M.

PCIe version3.0no data

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 A12-8800B 1.62
+116%
A6-3400M 0.75

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 A12-8800B 2580
+117%
A6-3400M 1191

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.

Pro A12-8800B 526
+149%
A6-3400M 211

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.

Pro A12-8800B 1141
+119%
A6-3400M 522

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Pro A12-8800B 2236
+47.9%
A6-3400M 1512

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Pro A12-8800B 6220
+26.4%
A6-3400M 4922

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Pro A12-8800B 2769
+29.7%
A6-3400M 2135

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Pro A12-8800B 16.49
+57.7%
A6-3400M 26

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Pro A12-8800B 3
+41.6%
A6-3400M 2

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.62 0.75
Recency 3 June 2015 14 June 2011
Chip lithography 28 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 35 Watt

Pro A12-8800B has a 116% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 191.7% lower power consumption.

The Pro A12-8800B is our recommended choice as it beats the A6-3400M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Pro A12-8800B and A6-3400M, 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 A12-8800B
Pro A12-8800B
AMD A6-3400M
A6-3400M

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.


4 5 votes

Rate Pro A12-8800B on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 172 votes

Rate A6-3400M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Pro A12-8800B or A6-3400M, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.