A6 7400k release date: AMD A6-7400K Specs | TechPowerUp CPU Database

AMD A6-7400K CPU — Pangoly


  1. Hardware and peripherals?

  2. Processors

  3. AMD
  4. AMD A6-7400K

Specifications Overview






Model
AD740KYBJABOX
Release Date
July 2014


* First availability for purchase, it may not correspond to the actual market launch date.


Series

A6 7th Gen

Core Name

Kaveri

Socket

Radeon R5 (on die)

CPU Cores
Buy

  • Interface
  • Core clock speed
  • Max video memory
  • Memory type
  • Memory clock speed
  • Maximum resolution

Summary

AMD started AMD A6-7400K sales 31 July 2014. This is Kaveri architecture desktop processor primarily aimed at office systems. It has 2 cores and 2 threads, and is based on 28nm manufacturing technology, with a maximum frequency of 3900 MHz and a locked multiplier.

Compatibility-wise, this is FM2+ processor with a TDP of 65 Watt and a maximum temperature of 72 °C. It supports DDR3-1866 memory.

It provides poor benchmark performance at


1.58%

of a leader’s which is AMD EPYC 7h22.


A6
7400K

vs


EPYC
7h22

General info


A6-7400K processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and pricing.

Place in performance rating 2099
Market segment Desktop processor
Architecture codename Kaveri (2014−2015)
Release date 31 July 2014 (8 years ago)
Current price $52 of 14999 (Xeon Platinum 9282)

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 2 (Dual-core)
Threads 2
Base clock speed 3.5 GHz of 4.7 (FX-9590)
Boost clock speed 3.9 GHz of 5.8 (Core i9-13900K)
L1 cache 128 KB of 1536 (EPYC Embedded 3401)
L2 cache 1024 KB of 12288 (Core 2 Quad Q9550)
Chip lithography 28 nm of 5 (Apple M1)
Die size 245 mm2
Maximum core temperature 70 °C of 110 (Atom x7-E3950)
Maximum case temperature (TCase) 72 °C of 105 (Core i7-5950HQ)
Number of transistors 2,411 million of 57000 (Apple M1 Max)
64 bit support +
Unlocked multiplier 1

Compatibility


Information on A6-7400K 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.

Number of CPUs in a configuration 1 of 8 (Opteron 842)
Socket FM2+
Thermal design power (TDP) 65 Watt of 400 (Xeon Platinum 9282)

Technologies and extensions


Technological capabilities and additional instructions supported by A6-7400K. You’ll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI +
FMA +
AVX +
FRTC 1
FreeSync 1
PowerTune
TrueAudio +
PowerNow +
PowerGating +
Out-of-band client management +
VirusProtect +
HSA 1

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 A6-7400K’s memory controller. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequency may be supported.

Supported memory types DDR3-1866 of 5200 (Ryzen 5 7600X)
Max memory channels 2 of 12 (Xeon Platinum 9221)

Graphics specifications


General parameters of GPU integrated into A6-7400K.

Integrated graphics card AMD Radeon R5 Graphics
iGPU core count 4
Number of pipelines 256
Enduro +
Switchable graphics 1
UVD +
VCE +

Graphics interfaces


Available interfaces and connections of A6-7400K’s integrated GPU.

DisplayPort +
HDMI +

Graphics API support


APIs supported by A6-7400K’s integrated GPU, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX DirectX® 12
Vulkan 1

Peripherals


Specifications and connection types of supported peripherals.

PCIe version 3.0 of 5 (Core i9-12900K)

Benchmark performance


Single-core and multi-core benchmark results of A6-7400K. 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.


A6-7400K
1.58

  • Passmark
  • GeekBench 5 Single-Core
  • GeekBench 5 Multi-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%


A6-7400K
1588

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%


A6-7400K
448

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%


A6-7400K
736


Relative perfomance


Overall A6-7400K performance compared to nearest competitors among desktop CPUs.



AMD Phenom X4 9550
100


Intel Celeron J4005
100


Intel Core i3-550
100


AMD A6-7400K
100


Intel Pentium G2010
99.37


Intel Pentium G3220T
99.37


Intel Celeron G1840T
98.73

Intel equivalent


We believe that the nearest equivalent to A6-7400K from Intel is Core i3-550, which is nearly equal in speed and higher by 2 positions in our rating.


Core i3
550


Compare


Here are some closest Intel rivals to A6-7400K:


Intel Pentium G2120T
101.27


Intel Celeron J4005
100


Intel Core i3-550
100


AMD A6-7400K
100


Intel Pentium G3220T
99.37


Intel Pentium G2010
99.37


Intel Celeron G1840T
98.73

Similar processors

Here is our recommendation of several processors that are more or less close in performance to the one reviewed.


Pentium
G2010


Compare


Pentium
G3220T


Compare


Celeron
G1820T


Compare


Celeron
G1840T


Compare


A6
6400B


Compare


PRO A4
8350B


Compare

Recommended graphics cards

These graphics cards are most commonly used with A6-7400K according to our statistics.


Radeon R5
Graphics

33.3%


GeForce GT
730

11.7%


GeForce GT
1030

5%


Radeon RX
550

4.2%


GeForce GT
710

3.8%


GeForce GTX
750 Ti

2.9%


GeForce GTX
1050 Ti

2.5%


Radeon
Graphics

1. 7%


Radeon R5
230

1.7%


Radeon R7
240

1.7%

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 A6-7400K, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.


Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.

AMD A6-7400K processor review: CPU specs, performance benchmarks

Buy on Amazon

A6-7400K processor released by AMD. The processor is designed for desktop-computers.

CPU is unlocked for overclocking. Total number of cores — 2, threads — 2. Maximum CPU clock speed — 3. 9 GHz. Maximum operating temperature — 70°C. Manufacturing process technology — 28 nm. Cache size: L1 — 128 KB, L2 — 1 MB.

Supported socket types: FM2+. Power consumption (TDP): 65 Watt.

The processor has integrated graphics AMD Radeon R5 Graphics with the following parameters: maximum frequency — 758 MHz, cores count — 256.

Benchmarks
















PassMark
Single thread mark

Top 1 CPU
This CPU


PassMark
CPU mark

Top 1 CPU
This CPU

118142


Geekbench 4
Single Core

Top 1 CPU
This CPU


Geekbench 4
Multi-Core

Top 1 CPU
This CPU


CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop
Face Detection

Top 1 CPU
This CPU

56.680 mPixels/s

2.362 mPixels/s

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop
Ocean Surface Simulation

Top 1 CPU
This CPU

741.453 Frames/s

2.939 Frames/s

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop
T-Rex

Top 1 CPU
This CPU

3. 237 Frames/s

0.108 Frames/s

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop
Video Composition

Top 1 CPU
This CPU

49.002 Frames/s

16.806 Frames/s

CompuBench 1.5 Desktop
Bitcoin Mining

Top 1 CPU
This CPU

218.231 mHash/s

2. 400 mHash/s

GFXBench 4.0
Car Chase Offscreen

Top 1 CPU
This CPU

9047 Frames

1162 Frames

GFXBench 4.0
Manhattan

Top 1 CPU
This CPU

7128 Frames

1842 Frames

GFXBench 4. 0
T-Rex

Top 1 CPU
This CPU

12887 Frames

3346 Frames

GFXBench 4.0
Car Chase Offscreen

Top 1 CPU
This CPU

9047.000 Fps

1162.000 Fps

GFXBench 4.0
Manhattan

Top 1 CPU
This CPU

7128. 000 Fps

1842.000 Fps

GFXBench 4.0
T-Rex

Top 1 CPU
This CPU

12887.000 Fps

3346.000 Fps

















Name Value
PassMark — Single thread mark 1423
PassMark — CPU mark 1588
Geekbench 4 — Single Core 437
Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core 724
CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection 2.362 mPixels/s
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation 2.939 Frames/s
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex 0.108 Frames/s
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition 16.806 Frames/s
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining 2.400 mHash/s
GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen 1162 Frames
GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan 1842 Frames
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex 3346 Frames
GFXBench 4. 0 — Car Chase Offscreen 1162.000 Fps
GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan 1842.000 Fps
GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex 3346.000 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)




















































Family AMD A-Series Processors
OPN PIB AD740KYBJABOX
OPN Tray AD740KYBI23JA
Place in performance rating 1467
Series AMD A6-Series APU for Desktops
Vertical segment Desktop
Base frequency 3. 5 GHz
Compute Cores 6
L1 cache 128 KB
L2 cache 1 MB
Manufacturing process technology 28 nm
Maximum core temperature 70°C
Maximum frequency 3.9 GHz
Number of cores 2
Number of GPU cores 4
Number of threads 2
Unlocked

Max memory channels 2
Supported memory frequency 1866 MHz
Enduro
Graphics max frequency 758 MHz
iGPU core count 256
Processor graphics AMD Radeon R5 Graphics
Switchable graphics
Unified Video Decoder (UVD)
Video Codec Engine (VCE)
DisplayPort
HDMI
DirectX 12
Vulkan
Configurable TDP 45 Watt/65 Watt
Sockets supported FM2+
Thermal Design Power (TDP) 65 Watt
AMD App Acceleration
AMD Elite Experiences
AMD HD3D technology
AMD Mantle API
Enhanced Virus Protection (EVP)
FreeSync
Fused Multiply-Add 4 (FMA4)
Heterogeneous System Architecture (HSA)
Intel® Advanced Vector Extensions (AVX)
Intel® AES New Instructions
Out-of-band client management
PowerGating
PowerNow
System Image Stability
TrueAudio
AMD Virtualization (AMD-V™)
IOMMU 2. 0

AMD A6-7400K processor review and testing GECID.com. Page 1

::>Processors
>2014
> AMD A6-7400K

12-17-2014

Page 1
Page 2
One page at a time

AMD’s updated line of APUs, codenamed «Kaveri», brings a number of new technologies to the series, as well as lower overall power consumption and improved performance. In previous articles, we have already got acquainted with high-performance solutions of this series: AMD A10-7850K, AMD A10-7800 and AMD A10-7700K. This material will be devoted to a more affordable APU.

Model AMD A6-7400K is equipped with two compute cores and AMD Radeon R5 series graphics. If you look only at the cost of this novelty, then in this parameter it is a competitor to the Intel Pentium series processors. If you study this CPU closer, you will notice a more powerful graphics core, thanks to which you can save on buying an inexpensive discrete graphics card.

Specification:

Model

AMD A6-7400K

Marking

AD740KYBI23JA

Processor socket

Socket FM2+

Base clock frequency, MHz

3500

Maximum clock speed with AMD Turbo Core 3.0, MHz

3900

Multiplier (nominal / turbo)

35 / 39

System bus base frequency, MHz

100

L1 cache size, KB

2 x 16 (data memory)

96 (instruction memory)

L2 cache size, KB

1024

L3 cache size, KB

No

Microarchitecture

AMD Steamroller + AMD GCN

Codename

AMD Kaveri

Number of cores/threads

2/2

Instruction support

MMX(+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4. 1, SSE4.2, x86-64, AMD-V, AES, AVX, XOP, FMA3, FMA4

Maximum design power (TDP), W

65

Maximum operating temperature, °C

70

Technical process, nm

28

Technology Support

AMD

64-bit

AMD Virtualization

EVP (Enhanced Virus Protection)

AMD PowerNow!

AMD Turbo Core 3.0

Built-in memory controller

Maximum memory, GB

Memory types

DDR3

Maximum frequency, MHz

1866

Number of memory channels

2

Integrated AMD Radeon R5 Graphics

Stream Processors

256

Texture blocks

16

Rasterization modules

4

GPU clock frequency, MHz

758

Instruction support

DirectX 11. 2

OpenGL 4.3

DirectCompute 5.0

OpenCL 1.2

Shader Model 5.0

Manufacturer website

AMD

Packaging, delivery and appearance

The processor comes in a colorful package that features AMD’s signature colors of red and black. On the front side there is a stylized image of the APU, and the presence of an integrated graphics core is also noted.

The side face traditionally contains a small transparent window that allows you to get acquainted with the appearance of the device, as well as study its marking and country of manufacture.

AMD A6-7400K includes:

  • cooling system;
  • quick installation instructions and CO;
  • computer case sticker.

In addition to the marking, the AMD A6-7400K cover shows the country where the crystal was grown (Germany) and where the final assembly was carried out (Malaysia). The reverse side is equipped with standard Socket FM2+ contacts.

Long copper pins are used, which are quite fragile, so you need to be very careful when installing the processor into the socket.

Standard cooling system

The new product comes with a fairly simple cooling system, which consists of a small aluminum radiator and a fan with the designation «FHSA7015S» with a diameter of 70 mm. This cooler is based on a hydraulic bearing, and its maximum rotation speed can reach 2800 rpm. The manufacturer also declared the maximum noise level, which should not exceed 20 dB. The fan is connected using a standard four-pin connector, which allows you to control its speed using the PWM method.

The heatsink contacts the processor thermal cover through a thin layer of thermal paste. To fix the entire CO, a standard metal mount with plastic latches is used, which has proven to be reliable, since it is used in most AMD processors.

Complete cooling systems for AMD A6-7400K (left) and AMD FX-8320E (right) processors

In our opinion, the comparison of standard cooling systems for AMD A6-7400K and AMD FX-8320E processors looks quite interesting. As you can see, the cooler used in the tested novelty has a noticeably smaller heatsink and a redesigned fan blades. At the same time, its TDP is also significantly lower: 65 W versus 95 W.

Performance Analysis

Together with the AMD Kaveri line, AMD switched to the designation of computing cores in APUs instead of processor and graphics. This approach is quite logical, given the peculiarities of the microarchitecture, but we will use a more familiar one. So, AMD A6-7400K has two processor cores that work in dual-threaded mode. Its nominal frequency (at the time of reading) was at the level of 3493 MHz with a multiplier of «x35» and a reference frequency of 100 MHz. At the same time, the core voltage was at around 1. 240 V.

After activating AMD Turbo Core 3.0 technology, the multiplier value rose to «x39», which led to an increase in the clock frequency to 3900 MHz. The voltage on the core during readings was at the level of 1.360 V.

When using the bench cooling system, the temperature of the novelty did not exceed 37°C, which is a very good result and significantly expands the list of COs that can be used with this processor.

AMD A6-7400K went into idle mode under light load. In this state, its clock frequency did not exceed 1400 MHz (with a multiplier of «x14»), and the voltage was at a very low level — 0.592 V.

The cache memory distribution of the hero of this review is as follows. 16 KB of L1 cache per core with 4 associativity channels is allocated for data caching. Instructions are allocated 96 KB of shared L1 cache with 3 associativity channels. Additionally, 1024 KB L2 cache with 16 associativity channels is provided. There is no L3 cache in this processor.

The integrated memory controller supports dual-channel operation of DDR3 modules with an effective frequency of up to 1866 MHz.

The AMD A6-7400K processor is equipped with a sufficiently powerful integrated graphics core of the AMD Radeon R5 Graphics series. It consists of 256 universal shader processors, 16 texture units and 4 raster units. At maximum load, the graphics processor operates at a frequency of 758 MHz.

Test

Processor A6-7400K [in 3 benchmarks]

AMD
A6-7400K

  • Interface
  • Core frequency
  • Video memory size
  • Memory type
  • Memory frequency
  • Maximum resolution

Description

AMD started AMD A6-7400K sales 31 July 2014. This is Kaveri architecture desktop processor primarily aimed at office systems. It has 2 cores and 2 threads and is manufactured in 28nm process technology, the maximum frequency is 3900 MHz, multiplier locked.

In terms of compatibility, this is an FM2+ socket processor with a TDP of 65W and a maximum temperature of 72°C. It supports DDR3-1866 memory.

It provides poor benchmark performance at

1.58%

from the leader, which is AMD EPYC 7h22.


A6
7400K

or


EPYC
7h22

General information

Information about the type (desktop or laptop) and architecture of the A6-7400K, as well as when sales started and cost at that time.

024

Performance ranking 2099
Type Desktop0021 70 ° C of 110 (Atom X7-E3950)
The maximum temperature of the case is 72 ° C

of 105 (Core I7-59595) from 105 (Core I7-5959)

The number of transistors 2. 411 million of 57000 (Apple M1 Max)
Support 64 bits

1

Compatible

Information on A6-7400K compatibility with other computer components. Useful, for example, when choosing the configuration of a future computer or to upgrade an existing one.

Please note that the power consumption of some processors can significantly exceed their nominal TDP even without overclocking. Some may even double their claims if the motherboard allows you to adjust the power settings of the processor.

AES-NI +
FMA +
AVX +
FRTC 1
Freesync 1

PowerTune
TrueAudio +
PowerNow +
PowerGating +
Out-of-band +
Virusprotect +
HSA 1

Virtualization Technologies

Technologies supported by A6-7400K that speed up virtual machines are listed.

9031

9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 9031 90URY
Types, maximum size and number of channels of RAM supported by A6-7400K. Higher memory frequency may be supported depending on the motherboard.

AMD-V +
IMMU 2.0 +

9331

The main characters will be three models representing three families — A6, A8 and A10. We have already tested the older processor in detail, but we did not communicate with the younger ones. It’s time to take care of them too.

DirectX Directx® 12
Vulkan
1

1

1

1

A6-7400K supported peripherals and how to connect them.

benchmarks

PCI Express revision 3.0 out of 5 (Core i9-12900K)

0479

These are the results of the A6-7400K performance tests in non-gaming benchmarks. The overall score is set from 0 to 100, where 100 corresponds to the fastest processor at the moment.


Overall benchmark performance

This is our overall performance rating. We regularly improve our algorithms, but if you find any inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in the comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

A6-7400K
1.58

  • Passmark
  • GeekBench 5 Single-Core
  • GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widely used benchmark that consists of 8 different tests, including integer and floating point calculations, extended instruction tests, compression, encryption, and game physics calculations. Also includes a separate single-threaded test.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

A6-7400K
1588

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application designed as CPU benchmarks that independently recreate certain real world tasks that can accurately measure performance. This version uses only one processor core.

Benchmark coverage: 37%

A6-7400K
448

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application designed as CPU benchmarks that independently recreate certain real world tasks that can accurately measure performance. This version uses all available processor cores.

Benchmark coverage: 37%

A6-7400K
736


Relative capacity

Overall performance of the A6-7400K compared to its closest competitor in desktop processors.


AMD Phenom X4 9550
100

Intel Celeron J4005
100

Intel Core i3-550
100

AMD A6-7400K
100

Intel Pentium G2010
99.37

Intel Pentium G3220T
99. 37

Intel Celeron G1840T
98.73

Competitor from Intel

We believe that the nearest equivalent to A6-7400K from Intel is Core i3-550, which is approximately equal in speed and lower by 2 positions in our rating.


Core i3
550

Compare

Here are some of Intel’s closest competitors to the A6-7400K:

Intel Pentium G2120T
101.27

Intel Celeron J4005
100

Intel Core i3-550
100

AMD A6-7400K
100

Intel Pentium G3220T
99.37

Intel Pentium G2010
99.37

Intel Celeron G1840T
98.73

Other processors

Here we recommend several processors that are more or less similar in performance to the reviewed one.


Pentium
G2010

Compare


Pentium
G3220T

Compare


Celeron
G1840T

Compare


A6
6400B

Compare


A6 PRO
7400B

Compare


A6
6420K

Compare

Recommended video cards

According to our statistics, these video cards are most often used with A6-7400K:


Radeon R5
Graphics

33. 3%


GeForce GT
730

11.7%


GeForce GT
1030

5%


Radeon RX
550

4.2%


GeForce GT
710

3.8%


GeForce GTX
750 Ti

2.9%


GeForce GTX
1050 Ti

2.5%


Radeon
Graphics

1.7%


Radeon R5
230

1.7%


Radeon R7
240

1.7%

User rating

Here you can see the evaluation of the processor by users, as well as put your own rating.


Tips and comments

Here you can ask a question about the A6-7400K processor, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report errors or inaccuracies on the site.


Please enable JavaScript to view the comments powered by Disqus.

Amd a8 7050 radeon r5 — Dudom

Manufacturer: AMD
Series: A8
Model: 7050
Base frequency (MHz): 1800
L2 + L3 cache (KB): 2048
Cores/Threads: 4/4
Technology (nm): 28
64-bit: +

Share

Like

HP Pavilion dv6-6b02er

Oh, and now I’ve stumbled) I read the whole topic in one breath) would be warm.

Overview MSI GP65

Domo! The middle segment is dead, long live the new middle segment! I would say GP.

samsung np305e5a-s0lru problems when replacing processor

Greetings forum users and specialists. tell me there is a samsung np305e5a-s0lr laptop.

MSI Cubi N

Overview

Now 16-22k on the market

Dell Vostro 13 5390 — best in business

An excellent combination of parameters and the absence of marketing kookies, such as erg.

Acer Aspire 5551G

I have an acer v3-551g-10466g75makk device, I need to replace the motherboard with which one.

HP Pavilion g7

Tell me if it is possible to change the processor to a new one on an HP Pavilion g7-1307er laptop

NVIDIA GeForce 610M

I even have GTA 5 on my laptop at medium-high. ASUS K53SD (Intel Core i3-2.

Acer Aspire V5-131-10172G32N

cool device! memory expandable up to 32 GB. what else does?

Acer Aspire 5742G-333G25Mikk

Laptop is just super for the price. I have been using for 10 years. Lightning damaged him a little. A.

Acer Extensa EX2511G-31JN

A good machine. I installed an SSD 250, threw it hard on a sled into the CD-ROM compartment.

Lenovo G500 59393618

Bought in 2012, have been using for almost 8 years

MSI GL65 9SCK: Head-to-Head
ASUS ROG Zephyrus M GU502 — not just for gaming
HP 255 G7: far from defeated
Dell XPS 13 7390 Step Up
Lenovo ThinkBook 15 — smart mechanism

NOTEBOOK-CENTER — laptops © 2006-2019

Full or partial use of site materials is possible only after the consent of the author or site administration.

The A8-7050 processor was released by AMD, release date: Q3’14. The processor is designed for laptop computers and is based on the Bald Eagle architecture.

Processor blocked for overclocking. Total number of cores — 2, threads — 2. Maximum temperature — 100 °C. Technological process — 28 nm. Cache size: L2 — 1024 KB.

Supported socket type: FP3 (906). Power consumption (TDP): 20 Watts.

Not so long ago we tested A4 and A6 processors based on the Richland core and came to the conclusion that the performance of such solutions is not great, but you can use them — even play games (in low quality mode, of course — but you can!). And today, as promised, we will deal with higher-level APUs, but, unlike previous articles, the main focus will be on models based on the Kaveri core. The fact is that no others are already actually shipped, and commodity balances do not last forever. Yes, the “oldies” are still quite relevant and attractive in price, but soon they simply won’t be left, and you should prepare for this in advance ?

Test stand configuration

Processor AMD A6-7400K AMD A8-7600 AMD A10-7800
Core name Kaveri Kaveri Kaveri
Production technology 28 nm 28 nm 28 nm
Core clock std/max, GHz 3. 5/3.9 3.1/3.8 3.5/3.9
Number of cores (modules)/computation threads 1/2 2/4 2/4
L1 cache (total), I/D, KB 96/32 192/64 192/64
L2 cache, KB 1024 2×2048 2×2048
L3 cache, MiB
RAM 2×DDR3-1866 2×DDR3-2133 2×DDR3-2133
TDP, W 65/45 65/45 65/45
Graphics Radeon R5 Radeon R7 Radeon R7
Number of HP 256 384 512
Frequency std/max, MHz 756 720 720
Price $70(77),
T-11010126
$106(67),
T-10674782
$154(66),
T-10674780
Processor AMD A6-6420K AMD A8-3870K AMD A8-5600K AMD A10-6800K
Core name Richland Llano Trinity Richland
Production technology 32 nm 32 nm 32 nm 32 nm
Core clock std/max, GHz 4.0/4.2 3.0 3.6/3.9 4.1/4.4
Number of cores (modules)/computation threads 1/2 4/4 2/4 2/4
L1 cache (total), I/D, KB 64/32 256/256 128/64 128/64
L2 cache, KB 1024 4×1024 2×2048 2×2048
L3 cache, MiB
RAM 2×DDR3-1866 2×DDR3-1866 2×DDR3-1866 2×DDR3-2133
TDP, W 65 100 100 100
Graphics Radeon HD 8470D Radeon HD 6550D Radeon HD 7560D Radeon HD 8670D
Number of HP 192 400 256 384
Frequency std/max, MHz 800 600 760 844
Price $63(68),
T-10737510
N/A(0),
T-7848554
$96(26),
T-8470908
$138(73),
T-10387700

For comparison, we will take four older processors (including one very old) from three, again, families. There are two A8, since there are two platforms — we are still interested to look again at the competition of four «half-cores» with four cores We had comparisons, so the old one is more interesting as a guide.

An important fact — without loud statements, the company actually «increased the value» of the graphics part of each family: the number of GPUs in modern A6 is the same as in the old A8, and in A8 there are as many as there were in A10. This is not to mention the architecture update — GCN instead of VLIW4. Most of the new A10s (with the exception of the 7700K, which belongs to the A10 family without any reason) are even higher. Considering that the bottleneck in older models is the memory system, it may turn out that such a GPU boost is simply superfluous. This, among other things, we will check.

And let’s also check how much Kaveri needs “enhanced power supply”, since all three models we have taken support Custom TDP. The fact that performance decreases when the heat pack is limited is a fact that has been repeatedly verified, but it is interesting how it compares with the old “gluttonous” models.

Test methodology

To evaluate performance, we used our performance measurement methodology using iXBT Notebook Benchmark v.1.0 and iXBT Game Benchmark v.1.0. We normalized all test results in iXBT Notebook Benchmark v.1.0 relative to the results of Pentium G3250 with 8 GB of memory and Intel 520 240 GB SSD, while the method of calculating the integral result remained unchanged. Another program that we, like last time, added to the test suite is the Basemark CL 1.0.1.4 benchmark, created to measure the performance of OpenCL code.

iXBT Notebook Benchmark v.1.0

A6 contains only one module, so this is a completely different world in terms of multi-threaded programs than A8 and A10, which (not surprisingly) differ from each other only in clock frequencies. Curiously, even in the 45 W mode, the models we have taken are already faster than any processors for FM1, and in the “regular” mode they are easily able to compete with APUs for FM2 with a TDP of 100 W. Well, the A6 is twice as slow, and it doesn’t really matter if it’s new or old.

The difference between families remains, but between generations it decreases. But, in principle, as we can see, even 45 W is not such a terrible limitation: the performance remains at the level of the Pentium of the recent past. Not much of an achievement, as we’re comparing two- and four-threaded processors in applications that can use all the resources, but the «regular» Pentium models have a slightly larger thermal package. Well, if you don’t “clamp” it, then once again intra-company competition looks interesting — not every old model with a TDP of 100 W can overtake the new economical APUs of the A8 and A10 families in terms of performance.

Photoshop, as we have already written more than once, is not too susceptible to the number of computation threads. But not completely immune — after all, the A6 (both new and old) is about one and a half times slower than two-module models of all generations. But the lag behind the quad-core APUs for FM1 has been greatly reduced. And in general, the best model for this platform also lags behind the A8-7600 in 45 W mode, which is quite interesting for those who plan to assemble a computer in a compact case.

Audition needs more than two cores (and even semi-cores), to an even lesser extent than Photoshop, but this does not allow A6 (the best modifications) to keep up with processors of higher classes. On the other hand, the latter is far from the dual-core Pentium, and even Celeron based on modern architectures.

Well, where there is multi-threaded optimization, A8/A10 keep quite at the Pentium level, and A6 lag behind all those listed by a couple of times. Nothing new. So, we can only once again pay attention to the increase in the energy efficiency of modern APUs, which, even with a limited heat pack, are able to fight on equal terms with the old top models.

In WinRAR, all newfangled optimizations fail, so everything starts to be determined by the clock frequency, which is not high in Kaveri in all variants. On the other hand, the A10-7800 still looks good, but it is quite expensive, and the A8-7600 is already outperformed by its immediate predecessors. Or even not direct — 5600K is a two-year-old model. However, in fairness, if we took not it, but the 5500 with a TDP of 65 W, there would be no lag. but the win is still the same ?

A processor with a lower TDP leads to increased «viscosity» of the system, although, other things being equal, this is not very noticeable. If only because the A10-7800 in 45W mode keeps at the level of the first generation FM2 with a TDP of 100W. And the main thing in this test is not the processor at all — we recall that «hard» laptops in this test are on average three times slower, regardless of the central processor. In general, it’s worth starting anyway with the purchase of a solid-state drive (even when assembling a budget system), and then paying attention to other components.

Why does the A10-7850K look pale compared to its predecessors? Why is the Steamroller microarchitecture used only in the APU, while the multi-module processors of the FX family remained on the older Piledriver? It seems to us that this diagram explains a lot. It’s very simple: Steamroller is not for maximum performance, it’s an example of good scaling «down». In fact, the third generation of APUs is intended primarily for laptops — AMD has done the same thing as Intel did earlier: the «desktop» market is no longer a locomotive, but something that turns out according to the residual principle. At the time of Llano, an attempt to limit the heat pack to the acceptable level in portable computers led to dramatic consequences: when the A8-3500M could not keep up with the budget desktop A6-3500 with fewer cores, and the Pentium G2130 lagged behind one and a half times. Because of which? Yes, just due to the need to meet 35 watts. Well, Kaveri in the 45 W mode at least calmly competes with the Pentium, and in general — doubling the heat pack allows you to increase performance by only 20%. Actually, do you need it? ?

As for more mundane things, it is obvious that one module is not enough for many modern programs. Moreover, just in this configuration, there is no special gain from the new architecture: A6-6420K and A6-7400K come to the finish line head to head when using the same heat pack. The addition of the second module changes the situation radically — the performance increases one and a half times, which is very good. And, as expected, there is no difference between the A8 and A10 in these tests — their processor component is almost the same. So it’s more interesting to look at the tests of the graphics core.

OpenCL

What distinguishes any APU of the Kaveri family from its predecessors is the performance when executing OpenCL code: even the A6-7400K in 45 W mode easily overtakes both the old A10 and Intel processors with HD Graphics 4600 GPU. As a result, we can only drag out the old song: now, if all this extended not only to synthetic benchmarks, but also to mass-purpose programs. Indeed: the new architecture of the graphics part would allow even lower-end models to easily catch up and overtake even expensive Core i7, clearly demonstrating the advantages of AMD’s approach to creating processors. But the reality so far looks much more boring and familiar.

As expected based on the performance characteristics, the gaming performance of the new A6 is about the same as the old A8, and the latest generation A8 is able to compete with the A10. That’s what’s unpleasant — and with the new A10 too, since the limiting factor is the memory bandwidth, and it is already maximum in the Kaveri-based A8. In general, we are convinced that the A8 of the 7000 series is already enough to play this game in high resolution, and there is no point in paying for the A10 — it will not be faster.

In this FullHD game, even the old A6 «pulls out», but only older models. At the same time, one module is already not enough, so the A8-7600 turns out to be the best option from the tested ones: more expensive models are not faster, and cheaper ones are much slower.

It is noteworthy that despite the single-threaded «tank» engine, A6 noticeably loses here to any dual-module processors. Other than that, there is no alternative to the older Richland high-frequency ones (which we have long seen), although this is not so important — since the A8-7600 in FullHD even with a limited heat pack produces more than 50 frames per second.

Quite easy for modern processors, the game well demonstrates different requirements for them depending on the mode — if in HD A10-6800K is out of competition, then in Full HD it lags behind A8-7600 by 65 W, and from A10- 7800 — even in the most economical mode.

A6 «does not pull» this game in any mode, since one module is not enough for it even in terms of the processor part, but A8 and above is enough for at least HD. Moreover, in economy mode, but “and above” is not required.

The situation is similar to the previous case, but here the requirements for the processor are even higher, and for graphics — perhaps lower, so on modern A8 and any A10 you can already try to use the full resolution of modern monitors.

Total

So, as mentioned above, the heat pack limit reduces the performance of the processor part in an acceptable way, and has almost no effect on games at all. In general, if we assume that energy efficiency was at the forefront when creating Kaveri, then this goal is more than achieved. And given that these APUs are primarily focused on the market of computers without discrete graphics (laptops, mini-PCs, inexpensive and compact multimedia system units), this situation generally causes a feeling of deep satisfaction ? As for achieving high performance, not everything is going smoothly here , since even two modules at full load are comparable only with Pentium, and at partial load they lag behind it. An attempt to increase the operating frequencies mainly leads to an increase in power consumption, not compensated by an increase in performance (it is, but obviously insufficient), and the limitations of the memory system make it pointless to increase the number of GPUs above a certain level, and the price of older models turns out to be too high to be achievable (taking into account the listed bottlenecks) by their performance. In a word, the best Kaveri models are A8, where “everything is already there”, but still “nothing interferes”, and the final price is at the level of that of Pentium with significantly better graphics.

2024 © All rights reserved