CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 5550M vs 5050

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

A8 5550M
6.6
A4 5050
6.1
3DMark06 (CPU), Passmark and GeekBench (32-bit)

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

A8 5550M
7.2
A4 5050
6.6
Passmark (Single Core)

Power Consumption

How much power does the processor require?

A8 5550M
5.3
A4 5050
5.6
TDP

Features

How does CPUBoss rank the features of each product?

A8 5550M
5.1
A4 5050
4.2
Features and specifications that differ between products

CPUBoss Score

Performance, Single-core Performance, Power Consumption and Features

A8 5550M
6.4
A4 5050
6.1

Winner
AMD A8 5550M 

CPUBoss recommends the AMD A8 5550M  based on its .

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

AMD A8 5550M

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of AMD A8 5550M

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of AMD A8 5550M

Reasons to consider the
AMD A8 5550M

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 4 MB vs 2 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Higher clock speed 2.1 GHz vs 1.55 GHz More than 35% higher clock speed
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for maximum performance when needed, while conserving power and minimizing heat production when not needed
Has a NX bit Yes vs No Somewhat common; Prevents a common class of security exploits
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Significantly higher Maximum Operating Temperature 105 °C vs 90 °C More than 15% higher Maximum Operating Temperature
Better PassMark (Single core) score 994 vs 717 Around 40% better PassMark (Single core) score
Better PassMark score 2,991 vs 1,903 More than 55% better PassMark score
Better 3DMark06 CPU score 2,795 vs 2,038.5 More than 35% better 3DMark06 CPU score
Slightly better geekbench (32-bit) score 3,340 vs 2,496 Around 35% better geekbench (32-bit) score
Front view of AMD A4 5050

Reasons to consider the
AMD A4 5050

Report a correction
Newer manufacturing process 28 nms vs 32 nms A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Significantly lower typical power consumption 10.97W vs 28.44W 2.6x lower typical power consumption
Better performance per watt 20.96 pt/W vs 10.77 pt/W Around 95% better performance per watt
Newer Feb, 2014 vs Mar, 2013 Release date 10 months later
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 3.25 $/year vs 8.43 $/year 2.6x lower annual home energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of A8 5550M vs A4 5050

GeekBench (32-bit)

A8 5550M
3,340
A4 5050
2,496

GeekBench

A8 5550M
3,340
A4 5050
2,823

3D Mark 06 (CPU)

A8 5550M
2,795
A4 5050
2,038.5

Passmark

A8 5550M
2,991
A4 5050
1,903

Passmark (Single Core)

A8 5550M
994
A4 5050
717

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

A8 5550M  vs
A4 5050 
Clock speed 2.1 GHz 1.55 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core
Is unlocked No No
Is hyperthreaded No No

features

Has a NX bit Yes No
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction-set-extensions
MMX
SSE
SSE4.2
AVX
SSE3
SSE2
F16C
Supplemental SSE3
SSE4.1
SSE4
SSE4a
AES
SSE Family
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes No

power consumption

TDP 35W 13.5W
Annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year 3.25 $/year
Performance per watt 10.77 pt/W 20.96 pt/W
Typical power consumption 28.44W 10.97W

details

A8 5550M  vs
A4 5050 
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 4 MB 2 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nms 28 nms
Max CPUs 1 1
Operating temperature Unknown - 105°C Unknown - 90°C

gpu

GPU GPU GPU
Label Radeon™ HD 8550G Radeon HD 8330
AMD A8 5550M
Report a correction
AMD A4 5050
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus