A8-7600 vs Ryzen 5 3500U
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 5 3500U outperforms A8-7600 by a whopping 115% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 5 3500U and A8-7600 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1345 | 1907 |
| Place by popularity | 36 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD Ryzen 5 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 27.57 | 2.96 |
| Architecture codename | Picasso-U (Zen+) (2019−2020) | Kaveri (2014−2015) |
| Release date | 6 January 2019 (5 years ago) | 31 July 2014 (10 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 5 3500U and A8-7600 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 | 2.1 GHz | 3.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 3.8 GHz |
| Bus type | PCIe 3.0 | no data |
| Multiplier | 21 | no data |
| L1 cache | 128K (per core) | 256 KB |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 4096 KB |
| L3 cache | 4 MB (shared) | no data |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Die size | 209.78 mm2 | 245 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | 71 °C |
| Number of transistors | 4940 Million | 2,411 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | + | no data |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 5 3500U and A8-7600 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 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | FP5 | FM2+ |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 5 3500U and A8-7600. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| FRTC | - | + |
| FreeSync | - | + |
| DualGraphics | - | + |
| TrueAudio | - | + |
| PowerNow | - | + |
| PowerGating | - | + |
| Out-of-band client management | - | + |
| VirusProtect | - | + |
| HSA | - | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 5 3500U and A8-7600 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
| IOMMU 2.0 | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 5 3500U and A8-7600. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR3-2133 |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 38.397 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) | AMD Radeon R7 Graphics |
| iGPU core count | no data | 6 |
| Number of pipelines | no data | 384 |
| Enduro | - | + |
| Switchable graphics | - | + |
| UVD | - | + |
| VCE | - | + |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Ryzen 5 3500U and A8-7600 integrated GPUs.
| DisplayPort | - | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Ryzen 5 3500U and A8-7600 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | DirectX® 12 |
| Vulkan | - | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 5 3500U and A8-7600.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 12 | 16 |
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 | 4.37 | 2.03 |
| Recency | 6 January 2019 | 31 July 2014 |
| Threads | 8 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 12 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 65 Watt |
Ryzen 5 3500U has a 115.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, 100% more threads, a 133.3% more advanced lithography process, and 333.3% lower power consumption.
The Ryzen 5 3500U is our recommended choice as it beats the A8-7600 in performance tests.
Be aware that Ryzen 5 3500U is a notebook processor while A8-7600 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 5 3500U and A8-7600, 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.
