A4-3300 vs Core 2 Extreme X7800
A4-3300
Core 2 Extreme X7800
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 Extreme X7800 is on rank 1145, 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 Extreme X7800
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | A4-3300 | Core 2 Extreme X7800 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Llano (2011−2012) / 32 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Merom XE (2007) / 65 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | A4-3300 | Core 2 Extreme X7800 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
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 Extreme X7800
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 Extreme X7800
The Core 2 Extreme X7800 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 17 July 2007 (18 years ago). It is based on the Merom XE (2007) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB L2 Cache. L2 cache: 4 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 44 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,138 points. Launch price was $851.
Processing Power
Both the A4-3300 and Core 2 Extreme X7800 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the A4-3300 versus 2.6 GHz on the Core 2 Extreme X7800 — a 3.9% clock advantage for the Core 2 Extreme X7800 (base: 2.5 GHz vs 2.6 GHz). The A4-3300 uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Core 2 Extreme X7800 uses Merom XE (2007) (65 nm). In PassMark, the A4-3300 scores 1,143 against the Core 2 Extreme X7800's 1,138 — a 0.4% lead for the A4-3300. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A4-3300 vs 4 MB L2 Cache on the Core 2 Extreme X7800.
| Feature | A4-3300 | Core 2 Extreme X7800 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.5 GHz | 2.6 GHz+4% |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | 2.6 GHz+4% |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 4 MB L2 Cache |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB (per core) | 4 MB+700% |
| Process | 32 nm-51% | 65 nm |
| Architecture | Llano (2011−2012) | Merom XE (2007) |
| PassMark | 1,143 | 1,138 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 266 | — |
Memory & Platform
The A4-3300 uses the FM1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core 2 Extreme X7800 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the A4-3300 versus DDR2-667 on the Core 2 Extreme X7800 — 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 4 GB — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: A55,A75 (A4-3300) and Socket P (Core 2 Extreme X7800).
| Feature | A4-3300 | Core 2 Extreme X7800 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FM1 | PGA478 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0+82% | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1600+50% | DDR2-667 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB+300% | 4 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Only the Core 2 Extreme X7800 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4-3300) vs VT-x (Core 2 Extreme X7800). The A4-3300 includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 6410D), while the Core 2 Extreme X7800 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-3300 targets Budget Desktop. Direct competitor: A4-3300 rivals Celeron G530.
| Feature | A4-3300 | Core 2 Extreme X7800 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | Radeon HD 6410D | — |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | VT-x |
| Target Use | Budget 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 Extreme X7800
