A8-7410 [in 19 benchmarks]
AMD
A8-7410
Buy
- Interface
- Core clock speed
- Max video memory
- Memory type
- Memory clock speed
- Maximum resolution
Summary
AMD started AMD A8-7410 sales 7 May 2015. This is Carrizo-L architecture notebook processor primarily aimed at office systems. It has 4 cores and 4 threads, and is based on 28nm manufacturing technology, with a maximum frequency of 2500 MHz and a locked multiplier.
Compatibility-wise, this is FP4 processor with a TDP of 12 — 25 Watt. It supports DDR3L-1866 memory.
It provides poor benchmark performance at
2.72%
of a leader’s which is AMD EPYC 7h22.
A8
7410
vs
EPYC
7h22
General info
A8-7410 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and pricing.
| Place in performance rating | 1692 | |
| Market segment | Laptop | |
| Series | AMD A-Series | |
| Architecture codename | Carrizo-L (2015) | |
| Release date | 7 May 2015 (7 years ago) | |
| Current price | $415 | of 15411 (EPYC 7351) |
Technical specs
Basic microprocessor parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters can generally indicate CPU performance, but to be more precise you have to review its test results.
| Physical cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | |
| Threads | 4 | |
| Base clock speed | 2. 2 GHz |
of 4.7 (FX-9590) |
| Boost clock speed | 2.5 GHz | of 5.8 (Core i9-13900K) |
| L2 cache | 2048 KB | of 12288 (Core 2 Quad Q9550) |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | of 5 (Apple M1) |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | of 110 (Atom x7-E3950) |
| Number of transistors | 930 Million | of 57000 (Apple M1 Max) |
| 64 bit support | + | |
| Windows 11 compatibility | — |
Compatibility
Information on A8-7410 compatibility with other computer components and devices: 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.
| Socket | FP4 | |
| Thermal design power (TDP) | 12 — 25 Watt | of 400 (Xeon Platinum 9282) |
Technologies and extensions
Technological capabilities and additional instructions supported by A8-7410. You’ll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, SSE4.2, AES, AVX, BMI1, F16C, AMD64, VT, AMD-V | |
| AES-NI | + | |
| FMA | FMA4 | |
| AVX | + | |
| PowerTune | — | |
| TrueAudio | — | |
| PowerNow | + | |
| PowerGating | + | |
| Out-of-band client management | — | |
| VirusProtect | + |
Virtualization technologies
Supported virtual machine optimization technologies.
Some are specific to Intel only, some to AMD.
| AMD-V | + | |
| IOMMU 2.0 | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel number of RAM supported by A8-7410’s memory controller. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequency may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3L-1866 | of 5200 (Ryzen 5 7600X) |
| Max memory channels | 1 | of 12 (Xeon Platinum 9221) |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of GPU integrated into A8-7410.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon R5 Graphics | |
| Enduro | + | |
| Switchable graphics | 1 | |
| UVD | + | |
| VCE | + |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of A8-7410’s integrated GPU.
| DisplayPort | + | |
| HDMI | + |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by A8-7410’s integrated GPU, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | |
| Vulkan | 1 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection types of supported peripherals.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | of 5 (Core i9-12900K) |
Benchmark performance
Single-core and multi-core benchmark results of A8-7410. Overall benchmark performance is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Overall 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.
A8-7410
2.72
- Passmark
- GeekBench 5 Single-Core
- GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
- Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
- Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
- 3DMark06 CPU
- Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core
- Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
- Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core
- Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core
- TrueCrypt AES
- WinRAR 4.0
- x264 encoding pass 2
- x264 encoding pass 1
- Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core
- Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core
- Geekbench 4.0 64-bit multi-core
- Geekbench 4.
0 64-bit single-core
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
A8-7410
2741
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.
Benchmark coverage: 37%
A8-7410
261
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.
Benchmark coverage: 37%
A8-7410
770
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.
Benchmark coverage: 20%
A8-7410
1917
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.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
A8-7410
4665
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.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
A8-7410
2936
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.
Benchmark coverage: 17%
A8-7410
2
Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core (sometimes called Multi-Thread) is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
A8-7410
174
Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core
Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
A8-7410
52
Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core
Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
A8-7410
0.6
TrueCrypt AES
TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.
Benchmark coverage: 13%
A8-7410
1
WinRAR 4.
0
WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using ‘Best’ setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.
Benchmark coverage: 12%
A8-7410
1292
x264 encoding pass 2
x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.
Benchmark coverage: 12%
A8-7410
10
x264 encoding pass 1
x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.
Benchmark coverage: 12%
A8-7410
46
Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core
Benchmark coverage: 6%
A8-7410
3687
Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core
Benchmark coverage: 6%
A8-7410
1256
Geekbench 4.0 64-bit multi-core
Benchmark coverage: 3%
A8-7410
3460
Geekbench 4.0 64-bit single-core
Benchmark coverage: 3%
A8-7410
1356
Relative perfomance
Overall A8-7410 performance compared to nearest competitors among notebook CPUs.
Intel Core i7-5500U
100
Intel Core i5-5300U
100
AMD PRO A12-9800B
100
AMD A8-7410
100
Intel Core i5-7Y54
99.
26
Intel Core i3-7100U
98.9
Intel Celeron J4115
98.9
Intel equivalent
We believe that the nearest equivalent to A8-7410 from Intel is Core i7-5500U, which is nearly equal in speed and higher by 1 position in our rating.
Core i7
5500U
Compare
Here are some closest Intel rivals to A8-7410:
Intel Core i5-4200M
101.1
Intel Core i5-5300U
100
Intel Core i7-5500U
100
AMD A8-7410
100
Intel Core i5-7Y54
99.
26
Intel Celeron J4115
98.9
Intel Core i3-7100U
98.9
Similar processors
Here is our recommendation of several processors that are more or less close in performance to the one reviewed.
Core i5
5300U
Compare
Core i7
5500U
Compare
PRO A12
9800B
Compare
Core i5
7Y54
Compare
Core i3
7100U
Compare
Core i5
4200M
Compare
Recommended graphics cards
These graphics cards are most commonly used with A8-7410 according to our statistics.
Radeon R5
Graphics
44.4%
Radeon R5
M330
15.3%
Radeon R5
M430
9.8%
Radeon R5
M335
2.3%
Radeon R5
M320
2.3%
Radeon R7
M340
1.8%
Radeon R7
Graphics
1.8%
Radeon R7
M440
1.
2%
Radeon
Graphics
1%
GeForce GTX
1050 Ti
0.9%
User rating
Here is the rating given to the reviewed processor by our users. Let others know your opinion by rating it yourself.
Questions and comments
Here you can ask a question about A8-7410, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.
Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.
AMD A8-7410 processor review: CPU specs, performance benchmarks
Buy on Amazon
A8-7410 processor released by AMD; release date: 7 May 2015. The processor is designed for laptop-computers and based on Carrizo-L microarchitecture.
CPU is unlocked for overclocking.
Total number of cores — 4, threads — 4. Maximum CPU clock speed — 2.5 GHz. Maximum operating temperature — 90°C. Manufacturing process technology — 28 nm. Cache size: L2 — 2 MB.
Supported memory types: DDR3L.
Supported socket types: FP4. Power consumption (TDP): 15 Watt.
The processor has integrated graphics AMD Radeon R5 Graphics with the following parameters: maximum frequency — 847 MHz.
Benchmarks
| PassMark Single thread mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark CPU mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench 4 Single Core |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench 4 Multi-Core |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1. 5 DesktopFace Detection |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop Ocean Surface Simulation |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop T-Rex |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop Video Composition |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop Bitcoin Mining |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 Car Chase Offscreen |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 Manhattan |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4. 0T-Rex |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 Car Chase Offscreen |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 Manhattan |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 T-Rex |
|
|
237 Frames/s
317 mHash/s
000 Fps| Name | Value |
|---|---|
| PassMark — Single thread mark | 805 |
| PassMark — CPU mark | 1819 |
| Geekbench 4 — Single Core | 262 |
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core | 781 |
CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection |
2.521 mPixels/s |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation | 6.553 Frames/s |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex | 0.116 Frames/s |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition | 7.405 Frames/s |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining | 22.317 mHash/s |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen | 661 Frames |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan | 1234 Frames |
| GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex | 3706 Frames |
GFXBench 4. 0 — Car Chase Offscreen |
661.000 Fps |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan | 1234.000 Fps |
| GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex | 3706.000 Fps |
| Boost clock speed | 800 MHz |
| Core clock speed | 200 MHz |
| Floating-point performance | 388.1 gflops |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm |
| Pipelines | 256 |
| Texture fill rate | 12. 13 GTexel / s |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt |
| Transistor count | 2,410 million |
Games performance
1. Counter-Strike: GO (2012)
2. Dirt Rally 2.0 (2019)
3. Metro Exodus (2019)
4. Far Cry New Dawn (2019)
5. Apex Legends (2019)
6. Just Cause 4 (2018)
7. Darksiders III (2018)
8. Farming Simulator 19 (2018)
9. Hitman 2 (2018)
10.
Assassin’s Creed Odyssey (2018)
11. Forza Horizon 4 (2018)
12. Shadow of the Tomb Raider (2018)
13. F1 2018 (2018)
14. Monster Hunter World (2018)
15. Far Cry 5 (2018)
16. X-Plane 11.11 (2018)
17. Kingdom Come: Deliverance (2018)
18. Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018)
19. Fortnite (2018)
20. Destiny 2 (2017)
21. ELEX (2017)
22. The Evil Within 2 (2017)
23. Middle-earth: Shadow of War (2017)
24. FIFA 18 (2017)
25.
Ark Survival Evolved (2017)
26. F1 2017 (2017)
27. Playerunknown’s Battlegrounds (PUBG) (2017)
28. Team Fortress 2 (2017)
29. Dirt 4 (2017)
30. Rocket League (2017)
31. Prey (2017)
32. Mass Effect Andromeda (2017)
33. Ghost Recon Wildlands (2017)
34. For Honor (2017)
35. Resident Evil 7 (2017)
36. Farming Simulator 17 (2016)
37. Civilization VI (2016)
38. Overwatch (2016)
39. Ashes of the Singularity (2016)
40.
Hitman 2016 (2016)
41. The Division (2016)
42. Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016)
43. Rainbow Six Siege (2015)
44. World of Warships (2015)
45. Dota 2 Reborn (2015)
46. The Witcher 3 (2015)
47. Dirt Rally (2015)
48. Dragon Age: Inquisition (2014)
49. Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare (2014)
50. Alien: Isolation (2014)
51. Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor (2014)
52. Sims 4 (2014)
53. Wolfenstein: The New Order (2014)
54.
Thief (2014)
55. X-Plane 10.25 (2013)
56. Battlefield 4 (2013)
57. Total War: Rome II (2013)
58. Company of Heroes 2 (2013)
59. Metro: Last Light (2013)
60. BioShock Infinite (2013)
61. StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm (2013)
62. Tomb Raider (2013)
63. Diablo III (2012)
64. The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (2011)
65. Deus Ex Human Revolution (2011)
66. StarCraft 2 (2010)
67. World of Warcraft (2005)
Counter-Strike: GO (2012)
| Low, 1024×768 | 39. 20 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 28.50 |
| High, 1366×768 | 25.00 |
Dirt Rally 2.0 (2019)
| Low, 1280×720 | 30.90 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 9.90 |
Metro Exodus (2019)
| Low, 1280×720 | 8.40 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 4.30 |
Far Cry New Dawn (2019)
| Low, 1280×720 | 6.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 2.00 |
Apex Legends (2019)
| Low, 1280×720 | 15.40 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 7.00 |
Just Cause 4 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 12.30 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 7.00 |
Darksiders III (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 22.50 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 11. 80 |
Farming Simulator 19 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 39.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 14.00 |
Hitman 2 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 7.40 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 3.50 |
Assassin’s Creed Odyssey (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 10.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 4.00 |
Forza Horizon 4 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 13.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 5.00 |
Shadow of the Tomb Raider (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 13.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 4.00 |
F1 2018 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 12.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 12.00 |
Monster Hunter World (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 4. 00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 1.00 |
Far Cry 5 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 4.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 1.00 |
X-Plane 11.11 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 13.70 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 9.40 |
Kingdom Come: Deliverance (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 7.50 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 3.00 |
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 8.10 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 4.30 |
Fortnite (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 28.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 7.00 |
Destiny 2 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 10.00 |
ELEX (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 6. 00 |
The Evil Within 2 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 6.00 |
Middle-earth: Shadow of War (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 8.00 |
FIFA 18 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 42.60 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 19.40 |
Ark Survival Evolved (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 15.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 6.20 |
F1 2017 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 18.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 13.00 |
| High, 1920×1080 | 10.00 |
Playerunknown’s Battlegrounds (PUBG) (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 12.10 |
Team Fortress 2 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 35.20 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 32. 80 |
Dirt 4 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 32.80 |
Rocket League (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 44.60 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 22.75 |
| High, 1920×1080 | 16.30 |
Prey (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 21.50 |
Mass Effect Andromeda (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 12.20 |
Ghost Recon Wildlands (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 10.90 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 5.20 |
For Honor (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 19.90 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 7.30 |
Resident Evil 7 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 28.60 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 13.20 |
Farming Simulator 17 (2016)
| Low, 1280×720 | 53. 40 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 36.10 |
Civilization VI (2016)
| Low, 1024×768 | 29.40 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 12.10 |
Overwatch (2016)
| Low, 1280×720 | 30.40 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 24.60 |
Ashes of the Singularity (2016)
| Low, 1280×768 | 7.00 |
Hitman 2016 (2016)
| Low, 1280×720 | 4.00 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 2.00 |
The Division (2016)
| Low, 1280×720 | 18.20 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 11.30 |
Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016)
| Low, 1024×768 | 17.03 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 10.70 |
Rainbow Six Siege (2015)
| Low, 1024×768 | 26. 90 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 21.60 |
World of Warships (2015)
| Low, 1366×768 | 37.70 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 28.80 |
Dota 2 Reborn (2015)
| Low, 1280×720 | 34.15 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 21.20 |
The Witcher 3 (2015)
| Low, 1024×768 | 9.00 |
Dirt Rally (2015)
| Low, 1024×768 | 59.70 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 22.00 |
Dragon Age: Inquisition (2014)
| Low, 1024×768 | 19.30 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 14.80 |
Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare (2014)
| Low, 1024×768 | 12.00 |
Alien: Isolation (2014)
| Low, 1024×768 | 24.15 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 15. 60 |
Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor (2014)
| Low, 1280×720 | 19.15 |
| Medium, 1344×756 | 12.40 |
Sims 4 (2014)
| Low, 1024×768 | 111.90 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 34.30 |
Wolfenstein: The New Order (2014)
| Low, 1280×720 | 17.40 |
| Medium, 1280×720 | 13.90 |
Thief (2014)
| Low, 1024×768 | 9.90 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 6.80 |
| High, 1366×768 | 5.70 |
X-Plane 10.25 (2013)
| Low, 1024×768 | 27.65 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 15.45 |
| High, 1366×768 | 7.75 |
Battlefield 4 (2013)
| Low, 1024×768 | 16.50 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 12. 00 |
| High, 1366×768 | 9.20 |
Total War: Rome II (2013)
| Low, 1024×768 | 27.00 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 20.30 |
| High, 1366×768 | 17.10 |
Company of Heroes 2 (2013)
| Low, 1024×768 | 13.00 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 10.00 |
| High, 1366×768 | 5.00 |
Metro: Last Light (2013)
| Low, 1024×768 | 13.95 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 10.60 |
| High, 1366×768 | 6.45 |
BioShock Infinite (2013)
| Low, 1280×720 | 40.12 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 24.13 |
| High, 1366×768 | 19.30 |
| Ultra, 1920×1080 | 7.50 |
StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm (2013)
| Low, 1024×768 | 75. 30 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 28.30 |
| High, 1366×768 | 17.60 |
Tomb Raider (2013)
| Low, 1024×768 | 46.53 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 24.40 |
| High, 1366×768 | 17.47 |
Diablo III (2012)
| Low, 1024×768 | 50.70 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 34.55 |
| High, 1366×768 | 27.70 |
The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (2011)
| Low, 1280×720 | 30.05 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 20.35 |
| High, 1366×768 | 14.15 |
Deus Ex Human Revolution (2011)
| Low, 1024×768 | 52.65 |
| High, 1366×768 | 25.65 |
StarCraft 2 (2010)
| Low, 1024×768 | 81.40 |
| Medium, 1360×768 | 24. 30 |
| High, 1360×768 | 18.60 |
| Ultra, 1920×1080 | 12.40 |
World of Warcraft (2005)
| Low, 800×600 | 82.60 |
| Medium, 1024×768 | 43.70 |
Specifications (specs)
| Architecture codename | Carrizo-L |
| Family | AMD A-Series Processors |
| Launch date | 7 May 2015 |
| OPN Tray | AM7410JBY44JB |
| Place in performance rating | 1774 |
| Series | AMD A8-Series APU for Laptops |
| Vertical segment | Laptop |
| 64 bit support | |
| Base frequency | 2. 2 GHz |
| L2 cache | 2 MB |
| Manufacturing process technology | 28 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 90°C |
| Maximum frequency | 2.5 GHz |
| Number of cores | 4 |
| Number of threads | 4 |
| Transistor count | 930 Million |
| Unlocked | |
|
|
|
| Max memory channels | 1 |
| Supported memory frequency | 1866 MHz |
| Supported memory types | DDR3L |
| Enduro | |
| Graphics max frequency | 847 MHz |
| Processor graphics | AMD Radeon R5 Graphics |
| Switchable graphics | |
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | |
| Video Codec Engine (VCE) | |
| DisplayPort | |
| HDMI | |
| DirectX | 12 |
| Vulkan | |
| Sockets supported | FP4 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 15 Watt |
| PCI Express revision | 2. 0 |
| AMD App Acceleration | |
| AMD Elite Experiences | |
| AMD HD3D technology | |
| Enhanced Virus Protection (EVP) | |
| Fused Multiply-Add (FMA) | |
| Fused Multiply-Add 4 (FMA4) | |
| Intel® Advanced Vector Extensions (AVX) | |
| Intel® AES New Instructions | |
| PowerGating | |
| PowerNow | |
| VirusProtect | |
| AMD Virtualization (AMD-V™) | |
IOMMU 2. 0 |
|
AMD A8-7410 Specs, Price, and FPS in Games
| 4 | 4 | 2.2 GHz | 2.5 GHz |
| Cores | Threads | Base Frequency | Turbo Frequency |
|---|
Geekbench 5 Single-Core
261
9%
Geekbench 5 Multi-Core
770
2%
Availability
No items available
Graphics Card
Resolution
Select game resolution
Graphics Settings
Select game graphics
Offset
…
Apply Offset
Value Rating
Performance Rating
Value per FPS
You will receive
… FPS
725
FPS
League of Legends
308
FPS
VALORANT
176
FPS
Grand Theft Auto V
186
FPS
Apex Legends
162
FPS
PlayerUnknown’s Battlegrounds
191
FPS
Fortnite
Alternatives For A8-7410
1080p, High
No alternatives — this is the best option
Specifications
| General | |
|---|---|
| Release Date | Unknown |
| Socket | Socket FT3 (BGA769) |
| Codename | Carrizo-L |
| Performance | |
|---|---|
| Cores | 4 |
| Threads | 4 |
| Base Frequency | 2. 2 GHz |
| Turbo Frequency | 2.5 GHz |
| Other | |
|---|---|
| Power Consumption | 15 W |
| Overclockable | No |
| Integrated Graphics | Radeon R5 Series |
Find out which of the 2 CPUs performs better, view a side-by-side specification comparison.
Ryzen 5 5600X
£194.5
A8-7410
N/A Stock
Ryzen 7 5800X
£284.99
A8-7410
N/A Stock
Ryzen 7 3700X
A8-7410
N/A Stock
Ryzen 9 5900X
£408.79
A8-7410
N/A Stock
Core i7-8700K
A8-7410
N/A Stock
Core i7-12700K
£388.88
A8-7410
N/A Stock
Refine results to filter 1558 processors by performance, release date, price, and value. Click on a CPU to view more in-depth specifications and game FPS.
Found 1558 CPUs.
Popularity
Processor
Performance
Ryzen 9 5900X
Release Date: Nov 5th, 2020
Performance Rating
£408.
79 on Amazon
In Stock
Ryzen 5 5600X
Release Date: Nov 5th, 2020
Performance Rating
£194.5 on Amazon
In Stock
Ryzen 5 5600G
Release Date: Apr 13th, 2021
Performance Rating
£149.49 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i7-12700KF
Release Date: Nov 4th, 2021
Performance Rating
£407.53 on Amazon
In Stock
Ryzen 7 5800X
Release Date: Nov 5th, 2020
Performance Rating
£284.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i5-11600KF
Release Date: Mar 16th, 2021
Performance Rating
£253.02 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i9-12900K
Release Date: Nov 4th, 2021
Performance Rating
£580.39 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i9-12900KF
Release Date: Nov 4th, 2021
Performance Rating
£589.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i5-12600K
Release Date: Nov 4th, 2021
Performance Rating
£328.
95 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i7-10700K
Release Date: Apr 30th, 2020
Performance Rating
£289.98 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i5-10600K
Release Date: Apr 30th, 2020
Performance Rating
£208.13 on Amazon
In Stock
Ryzen 7 5700G
Release Date: Apr 13th, 2021
Performance Rating
£246.7 on Amazon
In Stock
Ryzen 5 3600
Release Date: Jul 7th, 2019
Performance Rating
£225 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i7-12700K
Release Date: Nov 4th, 2021
Performance Rating
£388.88 on Amazon
In Stock
Ryzen 9 5950X
Release Date: Nov 5th, 2020
Performance Rating
£544 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i9-11900K
Release Date: Mar 16th, 2021
Performance Rating
£396.34 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i7-11700K
Release Date: Mar 16th, 2021
Performance Rating
£324.
91 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i9-10900K
Release Date: Apr 30th, 2020
Performance Rating
£379 on Amazon
In Stock
Ryzen 7 3700X
Release Date: Jul 7th, 2019
Performance Rating
£270 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i5-10400F
Release Date: Apr 30th, 2020
Performance Rating
£129.99 on Amazon
In Stock
Ryzen 9 3900X
Release Date: Jul 7th, 2019
Performance Rating
£655.47 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i7-11700KF
Release Date: Mar 16th, 2021
Performance Rating
£331.02 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i9-11900KF
Release Date: Mar 16th, 2021
Performance Rating
£388.45 on Amazon
In Stock
Core i9-10900KF
Release Date: Apr 30th, 2020
Performance Rating
£389.96 on Amazon
In Stock
Ryzen 7 3800X
Release Date: Jul 7th, 2019
Performance Rating
£285 on Amazon
In Stock
- Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- .
.. - 61
- 62
- 63
- Next
AMD A8-7410 processor review: specifications, benchmark tests
The A8-7410 processor was released by AMD, release date: 7 May 2015. The processor is designed for laptop computers and is built on the Carrizo-L architecture.
Processor unlocked for overclocking. The total number of cores is 4, threads are 4. The maximum clock speed of the processor is 2.5 GHz. The maximum temperature is 90°C. Technological process — 28 nm. Cache size: L2 — 2 MB.
Supported memory type: DDR3L.
Supported socket type: FP4. Power consumption (TDP): 15 Watts.
AMD Radeon R5 Graphics is integrated into the processor with the following graphics parameters: maximum frequency — 847 MHz.
Benchmarks
| PassMark Single thread mark |
|
|||||
| PassMark CPU mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench 4 Single Core |
|
|||||
| Geekbench 4 Multi-Core |
|
|||||
CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop Face Detection |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop Ocean Surface Simulation |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop T-Rex |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop Video Composition |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop Bitcoin Mining |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 Car Chase Offscreen |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 Manhattan |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4. 0 T-Rex |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 Car Chase Offscreen |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 Manhattan |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 T-Rex |
|
|
237 Frames/s 
317 mHash/s 
000 Fps | Name | Meaning |
|---|---|
| PassMark — Single thread mark | 805 |
| PassMark — CPU mark | 1819 |
| Geekbench 4 — Single Core | 262 |
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core | 781 |
CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection |
2.521 mPixels/s |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation | 6.553 Frames/s |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex | 0.116 Frames/s |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition | 7.405 Frames/s |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining | 22.317 mHash/s |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen | 661 Frames |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan | 1234 Frames |
| GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex | 3706 Frames |
GFXBench 4. 0 — Car Chase Offscreen |
661.000 Fps |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan | 1234.000 Fps |
| GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex | 3706.000 Fps |
| Boost Core Clock | 800MHz |
| Core frequency | 200MHz |
| Floating point performance | 388.1 gflops |
| Technological process | 28nm |
| Number of shaders | 256 |
| Texturing speed | 12. 13 GTexel/s |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt |
| Number of transistors | 2,410 million |
Gaming performance
1. Counter-Strike: GO (2012)
2. Dirt Rally 2.0 (2019)
3. Metro Exodus (2019)
4 Far Cry New Dawn (2019))
5 Apex Legends (2019)
6. Just Cause 4 (2018)
7. Darksiders III (2018)
8. Farming Simulator 19 (2018)
9. Hitman 2 (2018)
10 Assassin’s Creed Odyssey (2018)
11.
Forza Horizon 4 (2018)
12. Shadow of the Tomb Raider (2018)
13. F1 2018 (2018)
14. Monster Hunter World (2018)
15. Far Cry 5 (2018)
16. X-Plane 11.11 (2018)
17 Kingdom Come: Deliverance (2018)
18. Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018)
19. Fortnite (2018)
20. Destiny 2 (2017)
21. ELEX (2017)
22. The Evil Within 2 (2017)
23. Middle-earth: Shadow of War (2017)
24. FIFA 18 (2017)
25. Ark Survival Evolved (2017)
26. F1 2017 (2017)
27.
Playerunknown’s Battlegrounds (PUBG) (2017)
28. Team Fortress 2 (2017)
29. Dirt 4 (2017)
30 Rocket League (2017)
31. Prey (2017)
32. Mass Effect Andromeda (2017)
33. Ghost Recon Wildlands (2017)
34. For Honor (2017)
35 Resident Evil 7 (2017)
36. Farming Simulator 17 (2016)
37 Civilization VI (2016)
38. Overwatch (2016)
39 Ashes of the Singularity (2016)
40. Hitman 2016 (2016)
41. The Division (2016)
42. Rise of the Tomb Raider (2016)
43 Rainbow Six Siege (2015)
44.
World of Warships (2015)
45. Dota 2 Reborn (2015)
46. The Witcher 3 (2015)
47. Dirt Rally (2015)
48. Dragon Age: Inquisition (2014)
49. Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare (2014)
50 Alien: Isolation (2014)
51. Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor (2014)
52 Sims 4 (2014)
53 Wolfenstein: The New Order (2014)
54. Thief (2014)
55. X-Plane 10.25 (2013)
56. Battlefield 4 (2013)
57 Total War: Rome II (2013)
58. Company of Heroes 2 (2013)
59 Metro: Last Light (2013)
60 BioShock Infinite (2013)
61.
StarCraft II: Heart of the Swarm (2013)
62. Tomb Raider (2013)
63. Diablo III (2012)
64. The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (2011)
65. Deus Ex Human Revolution (2011)
66. Starcraft 2 (2010)
67. World of Warcraft (2005)
Counter-Strike: GO (2012)
| Low, 1024×768 | 39.20 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 28.50 |
| High, 1366×768 | 25.00 |
Dirt Rally 2.0 (2019)
| Low, 1280×720 | 30.90 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 9.90 |
Metro Exodus (2019)
| LOW, 1280×720 | 8.40 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 4. 30 |
FAR CRY New Dawn (2019)
| LOW, 1280×7 | 6.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 2.00 |
Apex Legends (2019)
| Low, 1280×720 | 15.40 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 7.00 |
Just Cause 4 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 12.30 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 7.00 |
Darksiders III (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 22.50 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 11.80 |
Farming Simulator 19 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 39.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 14.00 |
Hitman 2 (2018)
| LOW, 1280×720 | 7.40 | ||||||||
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 3. 50 |
3.50 | 3.50 | 3.50 | 3.50 | 3.50 | 3.50 | 3.50 | 3.50 9ATH0026 |
Assassin’s Creed Odyssey (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 10.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 4.00 |
Forza Horizon 4 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 13.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 5.00 |
Shadow of the Tomb Raider (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 130019 | |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 4.00 |
F1 2018 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 12.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 12.00 |
Monster Hunter World ( 2018)
| LOW, 1280×720 | 4.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 1. 00 |
Far Cry 5 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 4.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 1.00 |
X-Plane 11.11 (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 13.70 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 9.40 |
Kingdom Come: Deliverance (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 7.50 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 |
Final Fantasy XV Benchmark (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 8.10 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 4.30 |
Fortnite (2018)
| Low, 1280×720 | 28.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 7.00 |
DESSTINY 2 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 10. 00 |
||||||||
| Low, 1280×720 | 6.00 |
The Evil Within 2 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 6.00 |
Middle-earth: Shadow of War (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 8.00 |
FIFA 18 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 42.60 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 19.40 |
Ark Survival Evolved (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 15.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 6.20 |
F1 2017 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 18.00 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 13.00 |
| High, 1920×1080 | 10. 00 |
Playerunknown’s Battlegrounds (PUBG) (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 12.10 |
Team Fortress 2 (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 35.20 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 32.80 |
Dirt 4 (2017)
| LOW, 1280×720 | 32.80 |
Rocket League (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 44.0016 | Medium, 1920×1080 | 22.75 |
| High, 1920×1080 | 16.30 |
Prey (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 21.50 |
Mass Effect Andromeda (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 12.20 |
Ghost Recon Wildlands (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 10. 90 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 5.20 |
For Honor (2017)
| Low, 1280×720 | 19.90 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 7.30 |
Resident Evil 7 (2017)
| LOW, 1280×720 | 28.60 |
| Medium, 1920×1080 | 13.20 |
Farming Simulator 17 (2016)
| 53.40 | |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 36.10 |
Civilization VI (2016)
| Low, 1024×768 | 29.40 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 12.10 |
Overwatch (2016)
| Low, 1280×720 | 30.40 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 24. 60 |
Ashes of the Singularity (2016)
| Low, 1280×768 | 7.00 |
Hitman 2016 (2016)
| Low, 1280×720 | 4.00 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 2.00 |
The Division ( 2016)
| Low, 1280×720 | 18.20 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 11.30 |
Rise of the tomb raider
| Low, 1024×768 | 17.03 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 10.70 |
Rainbow Six Siege (2015)
| Low, 1024×768 | 26.90 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 21.60 |
World of WarsHips (2015)
| LOW, 1366×768 | 37.70 |
| Medium, 1366×768 |
Dota 2 Reborn (2015)
| Low, 1280×720 | 34. 15 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 21.20 |
The Witcher 3 (2015)
| Low, 1024×768 | 9.00 |
DIRT RALLY (2015)
| 59.70 | |||||||||
| Medium, 13666×768 | Medium, 13666×768 | Medium, 13666×768 | Medium, 13666×768 | Medium, 13666×768 | Medium, 13666×768 | Medium, 13666×768 | Medium, 13666×768 | Medium, 13666×768 | 0031 |
Dragon Age: Inquisition (2014)
| Low, 1024×768 | 19.30 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 14.80 |
Call of Duty: Advanced Warfare (2014)
| LOW, 1024×768 | 12.00 |
Alien: ISOLATION (2014)
| LOW, 1024×768 | 24.15 | Medium, 136689 | Medium, 130017 Medium, 13668 |
Middle-earth: Shadow of Mordor (2014)
| Low, 1280×720 | 19. 15 |
| Medium, 1344×756 | 12.40 |
Sims 4 (2014)
| LOW, 1024×768 | 111.90 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 34.30 |
Wolfenstein: The New Order,
| 17.40 | |
| Medium, 1280×720 | 13.90 |
Thief (2014)
| Low, 1024×768 | 9.90 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 6.80 |
| High, 1366×768 | 5.70 |
X-Plane 10.25 (2013)
| LOW, 1024×768 | Medium, 1366×768 |
| High, 1366×768 | 7.75 |
Battlefield 4 (2013)
| Low, 1024×768 | 16.50 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 12. 00 |
| High, 1366×768 | 9.20 |
Total War: Rome II (2013)
| Low, 1024×768 | |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 20.30 |
| High, 1366×768 | 17.10 |
Company of Heroes 2 (2013)
| Low, 1024×768 | 13.00 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 10.00 |
| High, 1366×768 | 5.00 |
Metro: Last Light (2013)
| LOW, 1024×768 | 13.95 | |||
| Medium, 1366×768 | 10.60 | 016 | High, 1366×768 | 6.45 |
BioShock Infinite (2013)
| Low, 1280×720 | 40.12 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 24.13 |
| High, 1366×768 | 19. 30 |
| Ultra, 1920×1080 | 7.50 |
Starcraft II: Heart of the Swarm (2013)
| Low, 1024×768 | 75.30 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 28.30 |
| High, 1366×768 | 17.60 |
Tomb Raider (2013)
| Low, 1024×768 | 46.53 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 24.40 |
| HIGH, 1366×768 | 17.47 |
Diablo III (2012)
| Low, 1024×768 | 50.70 |
| 34.55 | |
| High, 1366×768 | 27.70 |
The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim (2011)
| Low, 1280×720 | 30.05 |
| Medium, 1366×768 | 00026 |
| High, 1366×768 | 25. 65 |
StarCraft 2 (2010)
| Low, 1024×768 | 81.40 |
| Medium, 1360×768 | 24.30 |
| High, 1360×768 | 18.60 |
| Ultra, 1920×1080 | 12.40 |
World of Warcraft (2005)
| Low, 800×600 | 82.60 | 43.70 |
Features
| Architecture name | Carrizo-L |
| Family | AMD A-Series Processors |
| Production date | May 7, 2015 |
| OPN Tray | AM7410JBY44JB |
| Place in the ranking | 1774 |
| Series | AMD A8-Series APU for Laptops |
| Applicability | Laptop |
| Support 64 bit | |
| Base frequency | 2. 2 GHz |
| Level 2 cache | 2MB |
| Process | 28nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 90°C |
| Maximum frequency | 2.5 GHz |
| Number of cores | 4 |
| Number of threads | 4 |
| Number of transistors | 930 Million |
| Unlocked | |
| Maximum number of memory channels | 1 |
| Supported memory frequency | 1866 MHz |
| Supported memory types | DDR3L |
| Enduro | |
| Maximum GPU clock | 847 MHz |
| Integrated graphics | AMD Radeon R5 Graphics |
| Switchable graphics | |
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | |
| Video Codec Engine (VCE) | |
| DisplayPort | |
| HDMI | |
| DirectX | 12 |
| Vulcan | |
| Supported sockets | FP4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt |
| PCI Express revision | 2. 0 |
| AMD App Acceleration | |
| AMD Elite Experiences | |
| AMD HD3D technology | |
| Enhanced Virus Protection (EVP) | |
| Fused Multiply-Add (FMA) | |
| Fused Multiply-Add 4 (FMA4) | |
| Intel® Advanced Vector Extensions (AVX) | |
| Intel® AES New Instructions | |
| PowerGating | |
| PowerNow | |
| VirusProtect | |
| AMD Virtualization (AMD-V™) | |
IOMMU 2. 0 |
|
amd a8 processor 7410 reviews
Skip to content
Contents:
- 1 Description
- 2 Specifications
- 3 Synthetic tests
- 4 Game testing
| SuperPI 1M | 27.0 |
| SuperPI 2M | 61.0 |
| SuperPI 32M | 1557.0 |
| 3DMark06 | 2936 |
| Cinebench R11.5 CPU | 1.6 |
| Rating | 3Dmark06 |
|---|---|
| 118. Intel Core i5-480M | 2954 |
| 119. Intel Core i5-460M | 2945 |
| 120. AMD A8-7410 | 2936 |
| 121. Intel Core i5-2415M | 2887 |
| 122. AMD A8-5550M | 2884 |
| Rating of all mobile processors | |
AMD A8-7410 is a mobile chip (code Carrizo-L) for compact devices introduced in May 2015.
It differs in the initial level of performance, since the TDP is 12-15 W, the clock frequency of four processor cores does not exceed 2.5 GHz (boost clock), and additionally, the SoC has an integrated Radeon R5 graphics card, a south bridge with I / O ports and a single-channel DDR3L memory controller -1866. The predecessor AMD A8-6410 has similar characteristics, only the maximum frequency does not exceed 2.4 GHz.
Like Beema and Mullins, the Carrizo-L is based on AMD’s Puma architecture, which replaces the previous Jaguar design (Kabini and Temash APU). The new platform did not increase performance per clock, nor did it introduce new feature sets (including SSE up to 4.2, AVX and AES). However, power consumption has been reduced to increase clock speeds — this has increased the overall performance of the 28nm architecture.
AMD A8-7410 performance depends on TDP configuration. At 25W, the processor will be faster than the A8-6410, so it will be on par with a Haswell Pentium or ULV Core i3.
The integrated Radeon R5 graphics card should be similar to the Radeon R5 GPU (Beema) with 128 shaders. Few modern 2014 games will run at low settings, and only less demanding older games will run freely.
| Series: | AMD A |
| Code: | Carrizo-L |
| Clock frequency: | 2200 — 2500 * MHz |
| Level 1 cache: | 256 KB |
| Level 2 cache: | 2048 KB |
| Number of cores/threads: | 4/4 |
| Maximum power consumption (TDP): | 12 — 25 W |
| Process: | 28 nm |
| Socket: | FP4 BGA |
| Optional: | MMX, SSE4.2, AES, AVX, BMI1, F16C, AMD64, VT |
| GPU: | AMD Radeon R5 (Beema) (300 — 850 MHz) |
| 64 Bit: | + |
| Hardware virtualization: | VT |
| Release date: | 05/07/2015 |
* Specified clock frequencies are subject to change by the manufacturer.
Description
AMD started AMD A8-7410 sales 7 May 2015. This is Carrizo-L architecture notebook processor primarily aimed at office systems. It has 4 cores and 4 threads and is manufactured using 28nm process technology, the maximum frequency is 2500, the multiplier is locked.
In terms of compatibility, this is an FP4 socket processor with a TDP of 12 — 25W. It supports DDR3L-1866 memory.
It provides weak benchmark performance at 5.79% of the leader, which is AMD EPYC 7742.
AMD has officially introduced and started shipping AMD Carrizo and Carrizo-L mobile APUs. In this review, we will consider one of the representatives of the new AMD A8-7410 laptop processor line, which came to the previous generation AMD A8-6410 processor. The new CPU is based on a 28nm process using SoC design. Thanks to this, 4 processor cores, 2 MB L2 cache memory, an AMD Radeon R5 series graphics core, a DDR3 RAM controller and other controllers that were previously included in the chipset chip were placed on one chip.
AMD A8-7410 performance will depend on TDP configuration. At 25W, the processor will be faster than the A8-6410, so it will be on par with a Haswell Pentium or ULV Core i3. The clock frequencies of the novelty are 2200 — 2500 MHz, the predecessor AMD A8-6410, as you know, the maximum frequency did not exceed 2.4 GHz. As for the issue of energy efficiency, AMD indicates significant progress in this area. In particular, the TDP performance of the AMD A8-7410 dropped to a maximum of 25W. The minimum value is at the level of 10 — 12 watts. At the same time, there is an increase in performance / watt, not least due to the support of new technologies and optimization of the internal microarchitecture. We also note that the new processor can be installed in a socket — the motherboard’s FP4 version, or unsoldered on it with a BGA version.
It’s nice to note that the used graphics core AMD Radeon R5 (Beema/Carrizo-L) has support for the DirectX 12 API. And even though its capabilities may not be enough for modern games, it can cope with the interface of the operating system and application applications without any problems.
The integrated graphics core is equipped with 128 stream processors and a single-channel DDR3-1866 memory controller. The video card does not have its own video memory and will use part of the operational memory as it. The operating frequency of the core can reach 800MHz. The video card supports hardware video decoding with resolutions up to 4K using the UVD (Unified Video Decoder) decoder. There is also a dedicated video encoder called VCE (Video Codec Engine) and output via VGA, DVI, HDMI 1.4a and DisplayPort 1.2 ports to one or two external monitors. The performance of the Radeon R5 is roughly comparable to the Radeon HD 7470M or Intel HD Graphics 4200, which will not allow you to play modern games. This built-in video card will be able to freely play only games from 3 years ago, and even then only at low graphics settings and a resolution of no more than 102 4x 768 pixels.
Specifications
| Manufacturer |
|---|
| AMD |
| Series |
| A8 |
| Microarchitecture |
| Carrizo-L |
| Number of thread cores |
| 44 |
| Clock frequency |
| 2200-2500 MHz |
| L2 Cache |
| 2MB |
| Power input |
| from 15-25 W |
| Graphics core |
| Radeon R5 (800MHz), Shaders: 128 |
| Technology |
28 N. m. |
Synthetic tests
The need to test the computer processor appears in the case of overclocking or comparing characteristics with other models. The built-in tools of the operating system do not allow this, so you need to use third-party software. Popular representatives of such software offer a choice of several analysis options.
- 3DMark (2013) — Fire Strike Standard Graphics: 536 3DMark (2013) — Fire Strike Standard Score: 501 3DMark 11 — Performance Physics: 1760 Cinebench R15 -CPU Single 64Bit : 52 Cinebench R15 — CPU Multi 64Bit: 147 WinRAR: 1325 KB/s
Playtest
The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim . At medium settings (1366×768, Medium, 4xAA), the average number of FPS in the game was 14. At high graphics settings (1366×768, High 8xAA, 8xAF) — 10 PS.
AMD Radeon R5(Beema):Medium,(1366×768)—14%
AMD Radeon R5(Beema):High, (1366×768)—10%
Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200: Medium,(1366 ×768)—36%
Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200:High, (1366×768)—21%
Metro: Last Light. At low settings (1024 x 768, Low, DX10, 4AF) the average number of FPS in the game was 14. At medium graphics settings (1366 x 768, Medium, DX11, 16AF) — 9FPS.
AMD Radeon R5(Beema): Low,(1024×768)—14%
AMD Radeon R5(Beema):Medium,(1366×768)—9%
Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200:Low,(1024 ×768)—46%
Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200:Medium,(1366×768)—34%
BioShock Infinite. At medium settings (1366×768, Medium, AF, AA) the average number of FPS in the game was 19. At high graphics settings (1366×768, High, AA, AF) — 14 FPS.
AMD Radeon R5(Beema): Medium,(1366×768)—19%
AMD Radeon R5(Beema):High, (1366×768)—14%
Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200: Medium,(1366×768)—40%
Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200:High, (1366× 768)—35%
Tomb Raider .
Resolution 1366×768 pixels, graphics settings in the game (Normal, FXAA 4xAF), the average FPS was 17. When the resolution was increased to the level of 1366×768 pixels, graphics settings in the game (High, FXAA 8xAF), the number of FPS averaged 11.
AMD Radeon R5 (Beema): Medium,(1366×768)—17%
AMD Radeon R5(Beema):High, (1366×768)—11%
Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200: Medium,(1366×768)—58%
Intel Iris Pro Graphics 5200:High, (1366× 768)—35%
«>
Rubrics
- Uncategorized
- Dreamcast accessories
- Dreamcast games
- Dreamcast walkthrough
- Dreamcast emulators
- History
- Computers
- Help
- Attachments
both processors came out at about the same time CPU contain 4 nuclei Both models have 4 streams Two processors are supported by PCI-E 9 Two processors support 64-bit instruction set
| AMD A8-3800 | AMD A8-7410 | |
|---|---|---|
| CPU architecture is called L09 Alano 8-080019 | The nucleus architecture of the A8-7410 processor is called Carrizo-L | |
| A8-3800 This is a desktop processor | A8-7410 This is a mobile processor | |
| AMD AMD AMD AMD SOKETS AMD A8-7410 runs on Socket FP4 | ||
| A8-3800 wins slightly in terms of base frequency, 2400 MHz compared to 2200 MHz from 2400 MHz | ||
| A8-3800 slightly better in terms of auto overclocking, 2700 MHz compared to 2500 MHz | A8-7410 slightly inferior in terms of turbo frequency, 2500 MHz compared to 2700 MHz less technologically advanced, since its manufacturing process is slightly larger and is 32 nanometers | A8-7410 quite technologically advanced processor, its manufacturing process is smaller compared to the competitor and is equal to 28 nm |
The A8-3800 processor model has significantly more transistors, 1400 million vs. 930 million powerful cooling system, since its heat dissipation reaches 65 watts |
A8-7410 wins in terms of heat dissipation, its TDP is slightly lower than that of the competitor and reaches 15 W | |
| The A8-3800 core temperature limit is 70.5 °C. Not significantly inferior to the processor A8-7410 | The threshold for the maximum allowable core temperature in the A8-7410 is much higher and reaches 90 °C. And this is undeniably significant + | |
| A8-3800 can use a significantly larger number of RAM channels than its rival | A8-7410 is inferior in terms of the number of RAM channels than its competitor A8-3800 | |
| A8-3800 supports much more PCI-Express lanes than the competitor | A8-7410 is much inferior in terms of the number of PCI-Express lanes than the competitor | |
| 1st cache The A8-3800 processor has a much larger level compared to the A8-7410 and is equal to 512 Kilobytes | 2036 The L2 cache size of the CPU A8-3800 is much larger compared to the A8-7410 and is 4096 KB | The L2 cache of the CPU A8-7410 is much smaller than that of the A8-3800 and is 2048 KB |
Comparison of instructions and technologies
| Technology or instruction name | AMD A8-3800 | AMD A8-7410 | Short description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Turbo Core | — | AMD Auto Overclocking Technology . |
| Technology or instruction name | AMD A8-3800 | AMD A8-7410 | Short description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Enduro technology | — | Energy management technologies. | |
| PowerNow! | PowerNow! idle frequency reduction technology. |
| Technology or instruction name | AMD A8-3800 | AMD A8-7410 | Short description |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMX (Multimedia Extensions) | Multimedia extensions. | ||
| SSE (Streaming SIMD Extensions) | Streaming SIMD processor extension. |
||
| SSE2 (Streaming SIMD Extensions 2) | Processor Streaming SIMD Extension 2. | ||
| SSE3 (Streaming SIMD Extensions 3) | Streaming SIMD Processor Extension 3. | ||
| SSSE3 (Supplemental Streaming SIMD Extension 3) | — | Additional SIMD extensions for streaming 3. | |
| SSE4 (Streaming SIMD Extensions 4) | — | Processor Streaming SIMD Extension 4. | |
| AES (Intel Advanced Encryption Standard New Instructions) | — | Command system extension. | |
| AVX (Advanced Vector Extensions) | — | Command system extension. |
|
| F16C (16-bit Floating-Point conversion) | — | 16-bit floating point conversion. | |
| SSE4A (Streaming SIMD Extensions 4A) | Processor Streaming SIMD 4A Extension. | ||
| BMI1 (Bit manipulation instructions 1) | — | BMI1 bit control command set. | |
| AMD64 | 64-bit microprocessor architecture developed by AMD. | ||
| FMA (Fused Multiply-Add) | — | FMA4 | Fused multiplication-addition. |
| Technology or instruction name | AMD A8-3800 | AMD A8-7410 | Short description |
|---|---|---|---|
| EVP (Enhanced Virus Protection) | Improved virus protection. |
| Technology or instruction name | AMD A8-3800 | AMD A8-7410 | Short description |
|---|---|---|---|
| AMD-V | AMD-V Virtualization Technology. | ||
| IOMMU 2.0 (Input/Output Memory Management Unit 2.0) | — | I/O memory control unit 2.0. |
Benchmarks
Overall performance rating
The rating is calculated by an internal formula, taking into account indicators such as — test results in benchmarks, socket, number of cores and threads, release year, temperature, instructions, technologies, base frequency, structure, as well as other indicators. The results of the overall rating showed that the A8-3800 processor is not much superior to its rival A8-7410.
The A8-7410 processor itself was able to score 1955.54 points, slightly behind the competitor.
PassMark CPU Mark
It includes a wide range of tools for comprehensive assessment of computer performance, in particular the CPU. Among them are compression, floating point calculations, game physics calculations, encryption, integer calculations, extended instruction checking, multi-threaded and single-threaded tests. At the same time, it is possible to compare the obtained indicators with other configurations in the database. Perhaps the most popular benchmark on the Internet. All processors presented on our website have been tested by PassMark. Performance Test showed a clear advantage of the A8-7410 processor (2741 points) over the A8-3800 (1939 points). The A8-3800 with a score of 1939 clearly loses in this test.
Cinebench 10 (32 bit) Single thread test
Released by MAXON, it was based on the Cinema 4D 3d editor. Uses the ray tracing method.
The Single version in its test uses just one rendering thread and one core. This benchmark for testing video cards and processors is obsolete in our time. Works on Windows, Mac OS X. It is possible to check multi-processor systems. The main mode of passing tests for speed is spatial light sources, multilevel reflections, working with light, imitation of global illumination, photorealistic rendering of a 3D scene, and procedural shaders.
Cinebench 10 (32 bit) Multi-thread test
Multi Core is another way to test in the Cinebench R10 benchmark, which already uses multi-thread and multi-core testing mode. It is important to consider that the possible number of threads in this version of the program is limited to sixteen.
Cinebench 11.5 (64-bit) Multi-threaded test
Multi-threaded version of the CINEBENCH R11.5 test, it has the ability to test the CPU at 100 using all cores and threads. It differs from previous versions, 64 threads are already used here.
Testing the A8-3800 in Cinebench version R11.5 gave 2.87 points, which indicates a higher performance of this model. While the A8-7410 gets 1.9score, greatly inferior to his opponent in this test.
Cinebench 11.5 (64-bit) Single-threaded test
Excellent multifunctional Cinebench R11.5 from the Maxon team. His tests have not lost their relevance today. The checks still use the ray tracing process, rendering a complex 3D space with many translucent and crystalline and glass balls. In this case, Single-Core tests are performed using one core and one thread. The test score is the «frames per second» parameter. Testing in single-threaded mode of the A8-7410 processor in Cinebench 11.5 Single-Core showed that with a score of 0.61 points, it is not far ahead of the competitor. But the A8-3800 itself scored 0.6 points in this test.
Cinebench 15 (64-bit) Multi-thread test
Multi-Thread Cinebench R15 — will load your assembly completely, showing everything it can.
All CPU cores and threads are turned on in the process of rendering complex 3D models. It is ideal for modern multi-threaded processors from Intel and AMD, as it is capable of using 256 computation threads. The A8-3800, with a score of 228.26, unequivocally scores higher in Cinebench 15’s Multi-Core test. While its competitor, the A8-7410, lags far behind with a score of 174 in the test.
Cinebench 15 (64-bit) Single-threaded test
Cinebench Release R15 is the latest benchmark from the Finnish Maxon development team. A complex 3D scene is rendered with many light sources, detailed objects and reflections. With the help of this benchmark, the system is checked: both CPU and video cards. For the CPU, the result of the analysis will be the number of PTS points, and for video cards, the number of frames per second. FPS. In the Single Core version, 1 thread is involved in rendering. The single-threaded test of the A8-3800 processor in Cinebench R15 showed a result of 58.
21 points, slightly ahead of the competitor. With a score of 52 on this test, the A8-7410 is not far behind.
Geekbench 4.0 (64-bit) Multi-threaded test
This is already a 64-bit multi-threaded Geekbench 4 benchmark. It is the support for various devices and operating systems that makes Geekbench tests the most common at the present time. In Geekbench 4, the 64-bit multi-core processor A8-3800 received 4985 points, which is significantly higher than the A8-7410. In this test, the A8-7410 receives an extremely low score of 3460 compared to the A8-3800.
Geekbench 4.0 (64-bit) Single thread test
Latest Geekbench 4 single-threaded version for testing desktop PCs and laptops. This benchmark, like its earlier versions, runs on systems: Windows, Linux, Mac OS. Single-Core check uses 1 thread. For the first time ever, iOS and Android smartphones are also supported in this version of the program. The A8-3800 scored higher in Geekbench 4’s single thread test, with a score of 1650, but not far ahead of the competition.
But the A8-7410 itself also showed a good score of 1356 points, slightly losing its place to the A8-3800 model.
Geekbench 3 (32bit) Multi-core test
Geekbench 3’s Multi-Core Test — can allow you to put a big stress test on your PC and demonstrate the stability of your system.
Geekbench 3 (32 bit) Single-threaded test
The 32-bit version of the program loads only one thread and one CPU core. The Geekbench multi-platform benchmark is often used to test the system under Mac, but it can run on both Windows and Linux. The basic purpose is to test CPU performance.
Geekbench 2
A more outdated version of the Geekbench 2 benchmark. We have almost two hundred processor models on our site that have test results in this program. To date, there are newer updates, 4v and fifth.
X264 HD 4.0 Pass 1
This is actually a system performance test by transcoding HD files to the new H.264 format, the so-called MPEG 4 x264 codec.
An ideal benchmark for multi-core and multi-threaded CPUs. This test is faster than Pass 2 because it renders at the same rate. The number of frames processed per second is an indicator of the test. The MPEG 4 video processing speed of the A8-3800 is significantly higher at 58.65 FPS. But the A8-7410 did a poor job, its speed was 46 FPS.
X264 HD 4.0 Pass 2
This is a slightly different, slower test based on video file compression. The same MPEG4 x264 codec is used, but the processing is at an inconsistent rate. As a result, we get a higher quality video file. The final result is also measured in frames per second. You need to be aware that a completely real task is being simulated, and the x264 codec is used in a large number of encoders. And this means that the results of testing realistically reflect the performance of the platform. When measuring the speed of video file compression by the A8-3800 processor in mpeg4 format, the result was 14.27 Frames / s. Its competitor A8-7410 compared to it showed a much lower video encoding rate — 10 Frames / s.
3DMark06 CPU
Benchmark to test the video system, and the CPU. The CPUs are tested in two ways: the game AI does the pathfinding, and the second test simulates the engine using PhysX. This test is often used by gamers and fans of overclocking processors and overclockers. Based on DirectX 9.0 by the Finnish team Futuremark. The A8-3800 showed itself slightly faster in the tests for game physics, pathfinding, while gaining up to 3061.96 points. The A8-7410 also coped with these tasks, showing a good result 2936 points.
3DMark Fire Strike Physics
We can say that almost 2 hundred processors on our site have 3DMark Physics test data. It presents an arithmetic test that makes calculations in game physics.
WinRAR 4.0
A familiar file archiver. The tests were carried out under the control of the Windows system. The speed of compression in the RAR archive was estimated, for this purpose huge volumes of randomly generated files were taken.