|
| 7.1 Out of 10 |  | by Josh-Walrath (Mar, 2013) by Dustin-Sklavos (Jun, 2013) |
| | ||
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of the AMD A10 5750M among laptop CPUs (over 15W)
Performance | |
Benchmark performance using all cores | |
| PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more | |
Single-core Performance | |
Individual core benchmark performance | |
| PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more | |
Integrated Graphics | |
Integrated GPU performance for graphics | |
| Sky Diver and Cloud Gate | |
Integrated Graphics (OpenCL) | |
Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more | |
Performance per Watt | |
How efficiently does the processor use electricity? | |
| Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more | |
Value | |
Are you paying a premium for performance? | |
| Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more | |
| 7.1 | CPUBoss Score |
Combination of all six facets | |
Benchmarks Real world tests of the AMD A10 5750M
CompuBench 1.5 (Bitcoin mining) Data courtesy CompuBench
CompuBench 1.5 (T-Rex) Data courtesy CompuBench
PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated Data courtesy FutureMark
Sky Diver Data courtesy FutureMark
Cloud Gate Data courtesy FutureMark
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
In The News From around the web
| 28 Jun |
|
Lack of competition is showing in a major way: desktop Haswell is a joke, Haswell's GT2 IGP is a minor improvement yet promises to be the most common one in Intel's lineup, and Intel seems to be planning to mostly coast on Haswell for two years while focusing on Atom's successor.
Only the first pass in our x264 benchmark doesn't show a notable jump, but the second pass boasts a remarkable 20% increase in performance.
| 12 Mar |
|
As mentioned before, the majority of the gains we see today are the work of low level software optimizations.
AMD claims that these new algorithms can more adequately adjust for corner cases where both units may be bottlenecked, but can correctly decipher which unit actually will show the greatest performance increase by loosening the performance bottleneck.
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary
| Clock speed | 2.5 GHz |
|---|---|
| Turbo clock speed | 3.5 GHz |
| Cores | Quad core |
| Is unlocked | No |
features
| Has a NX bit | Yes |
|---|---|
| Has virtualization support | Yes |
| Instruction set extensions |
|
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes |
power consumption
| TDP | 35W |
|---|---|
| Annual home energy cost | 8.43 $/year |
| Performance per watt | 13.62 pt/W |
| Typical power consumption | 28.44W |
details
| Architecture | ARM |
|---|---|
| Threads | 4 threads |
| L2 cache | 4 MB |
| L2 cache per core | 1 MB/core |
| Manufacture process | 32 nm |
| Max CPUs | 1 |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 105°C |
overclocking
| Overclocked clock speed | 3.21 GHz |
|---|---|
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 2.5 GHz |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.21 GHz |
integrated graphics
| GPU | GPU |
|---|---|
| Label | Radeon™ HD 8650G |
| Latest DirectX | 11.0 |
| GPU clock speed | 533 MHz |
| Turbo clock speed | 720 MHz |
memory controller
| Memory controller | Built-in |
|---|---|
| Memory type | DDR3-1866 |
Report a correction Follow us
Compare
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $272 | $393 | |
| 4790K vs 6700K | ||
 | VS | |
| $227 | $393 | |
| 6600K vs 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 5200U vs 7410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $661 | $741 | |
| 6200U vs 6500U | ||
| | VS | |
| $281 | $661 | |
| 5200U vs 6200U | ||
| | VS |  |
| $281 | $161 | |
| 5200U vs N3700 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 4200U vs 6410 | ||
Read more
Comments
Showing 10 comments.
