A4-3300 vs Core 2 Duo E8200
A4-3300
Core 2 Duo E8200
Performance Spectrum - CPU
About PassMark
PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The A4-3300 is positioned at rank 814 and the Core 2 Duo E8200 is on rank 1048, so the A4-3300 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar A4-3300
Performance Per Dollar Core 2 Duo E8200
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | A4-3300 | Core 2 Duo E8200 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Llano (2011−2012) / 32 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Wolfdale (2008−2010) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | A4-3300 | Core 2 Duo E8200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) |
Performance Check
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of A4-3300 and Core 2 Duo E8200
A4-3300
The A4-3300 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Llano (2011−2012) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM1. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,143 points. Launch price was $50.
Core 2 Duo E8200
The Core 2 Duo E8200 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2008-01-01. It is based on the Wolfdale (2008−2010) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.66 GHz, with boost up to 2.67 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 6 MB (total). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,144 points. Launch price was $249.
Processing Power
Both the A4-3300 and Core 2 Duo E8200 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the A4-3300 versus 2.67 GHz on the Core 2 Duo E8200 — a 6.6% clock advantage for the Core 2 Duo E8200 (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.66 GHz). The A4-3300 uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Core 2 Duo E8200 uses Wolfdale (2008−2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A4-3300 scores 1,143 against the Core 2 Duo E8200's 1,144 — a 0.1% lead for the Core 2 Duo E8200. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 266 vs 350, a 27.3% lead for the Core 2 Duo E8200 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | A4-3300 | Core 2 Duo E8200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.5 GHz | 2.67 GHz+7% |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | 2.66 GHz+6% |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB (per core) | 6 MB (total)+1100% |
| Process | 32 nm-29% | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Llano (2011−2012) | Wolfdale (2008−2010) |
| PassMark | 1,143 | 1,144 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 266 | 350+32% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 650 |
Memory & Platform
The A4-3300 uses the FM1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core 2 Duo E8200 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the A4-3300 versus DDR2-800 on the Core 2 Duo E8200 — the A4-3300 supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A4-3300 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (A4-3300) vs 0 (Core 2 Duo E8200) — the A4-3300 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: A55,A75 (A4-3300) and P35,P45,G33,G45 (Core 2 Duo E8200).
| Feature | A4-3300 | Core 2 Duo E8200 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FM1 | LGA775 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0+82% | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1600+50% | DDR2-800 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB+100% | 8 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4-3300) vs VT-x (Core 2 Duo E8200). The A4-3300 includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 6410D), while the Core 2 Duo E8200 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-3300 targets Budget Desktop, Core 2 Duo E8200 targets Legacy Desktop. Direct competitor: A4-3300 rivals Celeron G530; Core 2 Duo E8200 rivals Phenom II X2 550.
| Feature | A4-3300 | Core 2 Duo E8200 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | Radeon HD 6410D | — |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | VT-x |
| Target Use | Budget Desktop | Legacy Desktop |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on A4-3300 and Core 2 Duo E8200
