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

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of AMD Athlon 64 3000+

Reasons to consider the
AMD Athlon 64 3000+

Report a correction

CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the Athlon 64 3000+ vs the A8 7600.

Front view of AMD A8 7600

Reasons to consider the
AMD A8 7600

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 28 nm vs 130 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much more l2 cache 4 MB vs 1 MB 4x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
More cores 4 vs 1 3 more cores; run more applications at once
Significantly lower typical power consumption 52.81W vs 72.31W More than 25% lower typical power consumption
Higher Maximum operating temperature 71.3 °C vs 70 °C Almost the same
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year vs 21.44 $/year More than 25% lower annual home energy cost
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year vs 77.96 $/year More than 25% lower annual commercial energy cost

Features Key features of the Athlon 64 3000+  vs A8 7600 

L2 cache

TDP

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Athlon 64 3000+  vs
A8 7600 
Cores Single core Quad core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
F16C
MMX
AVX
SSE3
SSE
BMI1
AMD64
SSE4.1
FMA4
FMA3
SSE4.2
AMD-V
3DNow!
Supplemental SSE3
AES
TBM

details

Athlon 64 3000+  vs
A8 7600 
L2 cache 1 MB 4 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 130 nm 28 nm
Operating temperature Unknown - 70°C Unknown - 71.3°C

power consumption

TDP 89W 65W
Annual home energy cost 21.44 $/year 15.66 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 77.96 $/year 56.94 $/year
Typical power consumption 72.31W 52.81W
AMD Athlon 64 3000+
Report a correction
AMD A8 7600
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus