Intel N3710 vs A1020 |
Released January, 2016
Intel N3710
- 1.6 GHz
- Quad core
Reasons to buy the Intel N3710
 | Significantly newer manufacturing process 14 nm | | Much better performance per watt 11.85 pt/W |
| | More number of displays supported 3 | | Better geekbench 3 AES single core score 411.9 MB/s |
VS
Released January, 2016
Intel A1020
- 2.41 GHz
- Quad core
Reasons to buy the A1020
| | Significantly higher clock speed 2.41 GHz | | Much higher GPU clock speed 688 MHz |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Significantly newer manufacturing process | 14 nm | vs | 22 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much better performance per watt | 11.85 pt/W | vs | 5.6 pt/W | More than 2x better performance per watt | |||
| More number of displays supported | 3 | vs | 2 | 1 more number of displays supported | |||
| Better geekbench 3 AES single core score | 411.9 MB/s | vs | 62.9 MB/s | More than 6.5x better geekbench 3 AES single core score | |||
| |||||||
| Significantly higher clock speed | 2.41 GHz | vs | 1.6 GHz | More than 50% higher clock speed | |||
| Much higher GPU clock speed | 688 MHz | vs | 400 MHz | More than 70% higher GPU clock speed | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of N3710 vs A1020
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
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | N3710 | vs | A1020 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 2.41 GHz | |
| Cores | Quad core | Quad core | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 6W | 10W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 1.45 $/year | 2.41 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 5.26 $/year | 8.76 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 11.85 pt/W | 5.6 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 4.88W | 8.13W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
| Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
details | N3710 | vs | A1020 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 4 | 4 | |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 2 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 0.5 MB/core | 0.5 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 14 nm | 22 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
integrated graphics | |||
| GPU | GPU | GPU | |
| Label | Intel® HD Graphics 405 | Intel® HD Graphics | |
| Number of displays supported | 3 | 2 | |
| GPU clock speed | 400 MHz | 688 MHz | |
memory controller | |||
| Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
| Memory type | |||
| DDR3L-1600 | |||
| DDR3 | |||
| Channels | Dual Channel | Dual Channel | |
| Supports ECC | No | No | |
| Maximum bandwidth | 25,600 MB/s | 12,800 MB/s | |
| Maximum memory size | 8,192 MB | 8,192 MB | |
 Intel N3710  Report a correction |  Intel A1020 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $275 | ||
| Intel Core i3 5005U vs N3710 | ||
 | VS | |
| $300 | ||
| Intel Core i5 2500 vs N3710 | ||
 | VS | |
| Intel N4200 vs N3710 | ||
 | VS | |
| $161 | ||
| Intel Pentium N3700 vs N3710 | ||
 | VS | |
| Intel N3060 vs N3710 | ||
 | VS | |
| $281 | ||
| Intel Core i3 6100U vs N3710 | ||
 | VS | |
| $161 | ||
| Intel Pentium N3540 vs N3710 | ||
Popular Comparisons
| | VS |  |
| $300 | $305 | |
| Intel Core i5 2500 vs Xeon W3520 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $350 | $272 | |
| Intel Core i7 6700K vs 4790K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| AMD A8 6410 vs Intel Core i5 4200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| AMD A9 7th Gen A9-9410 vs Intel Core i5 6200U | ||
| | VS |  |
| $161 | $275 | |
| Intel Pentium N3540 vs Core i3 4005U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| AMD A6 5200 vs Intel Core i5 3470 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $225 | $134 | |
| Intel Core i3 3217U vs Celeron 847 | ||
