AMD A10-4600M vs AMD A10-4655M
Vergleichende Analyse von AMD A10-4600M und AMD A10-4655M Prozessoren für alle bekannten Merkmale in den folgenden Kategorien: Essenzielles, Leistung, Speicher, Kompatibilität, Fortschrittliche Technologien, Virtualisierung. Benchmark-Prozessorleistungsanalyse: PassMark - Single thread mark, PassMark - CPU mark, Geekbench 4 - Single Core, Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Unterschiede
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der AMD A10-4600M
- Etwa 14% höhere Taktfrequenz: 3.2 GHz vs 2.8 GHz
- Etwa 20% bessere Leistung in PassMark - Single thread mark: 1079 vs 896
- Etwa 17% bessere Leistung in PassMark - CPU mark: 1939 vs 1651
- Etwa 34% bessere Leistung in Geekbench 4 - Single Core: 354 vs 264
- Etwa 30% bessere Leistung in Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core: 912 vs 703
- Etwa 10% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 3.171 vs 2.88
- Etwa 26% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 13.506 vs 10.709
- Etwa 24% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 1695 vs 1371
- Etwa 1% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 3279 vs 3232
- Etwa 24% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 1695 vs 1371
- Etwa 1% bessere Leistung in GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 3279 vs 3232
| Spezifikationen | |
| Maximale Frequenz | 3.2 GHz vs 2.8 GHz |
| Benchmarks | |
| PassMark - Single thread mark | 1079 vs 896 |
| PassMark - CPU mark | 1939 vs 1651 |
| Geekbench 4 - Single Core | 354 vs 264 |
| Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core | 912 vs 703 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 3.171 vs 2.88 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 13.506 vs 10.709 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1695 vs 1371 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3279 vs 3232 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1695 vs 1371 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3279 vs 3232 |
Gründe, die für die Berücksichtigung der AMD A10-4655M
- Etwa 40% geringere typische Leistungsaufnahme: 25 Watt vs 35 Watt
- Etwa 45% bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 10.434 vs 7.18
- 2.2x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.364 vs 0.162
- 21.2x bessere Leistung in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 40.12 vs 1.896
| Spezifikationen | |
| Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 25 Watt vs 35 Watt |
| Benchmarks | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 10.434 vs 7.18 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.364 vs 0.162 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 40.12 vs 1.896 |
Benchmarks vergleichen
CPU 1: AMD A10-4600M
CPU 2: AMD A10-4655M
| PassMark - Single thread mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - CPU mark |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench 4 - Single Core |
|
|
||||
| Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Name | AMD A10-4600M | AMD A10-4655M |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - Single thread mark | 1079 | 896 |
| PassMark - CPU mark | 1939 | 1651 |
| Geekbench 4 - Single Core | 354 | 264 |
| Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core | 912 | 703 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 3.171 | 2.88 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 7.18 | 10.434 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.162 | 0.364 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 13.506 | 10.709 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 1.896 | 40.12 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 1695 | 1371 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 3279 | 3232 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 1695 | 1371 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 3279 | 3232 |
Vergleichen Sie Spezifikationen
| AMD A10-4600M | AMD A10-4655M | |
|---|---|---|
Essenzielles |
||
| Architektur Codename | Trinity | Trinity |
| Startdatum | 15 May 2012 | 15 May 2012 |
| Platz in der Leistungsbewertung | 2052 | 2053 |
| Serie | AMD A-Series | AMD A-Series |
| Vertikales Segment | Laptop | Laptop |
Leistung |
||
| 64-Bit-Unterstützung | ||
| Matrizengröße | 246 mm | 246 mm |
| L1 Cache | 192 KB | 192 KB |
| L2 Cache | 4 MB | 4096 KB |
| Fertigungsprozesstechnik | 32 nm | 32 nm |
| Maximale Frequenz | 3.2 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
| Anzahl der Adern | 4 | 4 |
| Anzahl der Gewinde | 4 | 4 |
| Anzahl der Transistoren | 1303 Million | 1303 Million |
| Maximale Gehäusetemperatur (TCase) | 100 °C | |
Speicher |
||
| Unterstützte Speichertypen | DDR3 | |
Kompatibilität |
||
| Maximale Anzahl von CPUs in einer Konfiguration | 1 | 1 |
| Unterstützte Sockel | FS1r2 | FP2 |
| Thermische Designleistung (TDP) | 35 Watt | 25 Watt |
Fortschrittliche Technologien |
||
| Fused Multiply-Add (FMA) | ||
| Intel® Advanced Vector Extensions (AVX) | ||
| Intel® AES New Instructions | ||
Virtualisierung |
||
| AMD Virtualization (AMD-V™) | ||
