A4-4000 vs Core 2 Duo E7500

A4-4000 vs Core 2 Duo E7500 Performance Spectrum

A4-4000

2 / 2

1,152

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core 2 Duo E7500

2 / 2

1,157

+0.4%

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.

A4-4000 vs Core 2 Duo E7500 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

A4-4000 vs Core 2 Duo E7500: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

A4-4000

2013

Why buy it

✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 7480D, while Core 2 Duo E7500 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,152 vs 1,157).

Core 2 Duo E7500

2009

Why buy it

✅+0.4% higher PassMark.
✅100% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $113 MSRP, while A4-4000 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while A4-4000 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core 2 Duo E7500 better than A4-4000?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A4-4000 is ahead with a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core 2 Duo E7500 pulls ahead with 0.4% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core 2 Duo E7500 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core 2 Duo E7500 is the better buy right now. Core 2 Duo E7500 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $113 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.4% better PassMark. The compromise is that A4-4000 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (10.2 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

A4-4000 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2009). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A4-4000 vs Core 2 Duo E7500 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

A4-4000

The A4-4000 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Richland (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,152 points. Launch price was $50.

Core 2 Duo E7500

The Core 2 Duo E7500 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 2.93 GHz, with boost up to 0.93 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 3 MB (total). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,157 points. Launch price was $249.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A4-4000 and Core 2 Duo E7500 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.2 GHz on the A4-4000 versus 0.93 GHz on the Core 2 Duo E7500 — a 109.9% clock advantage for the A4-4000 (base: 3 GHz vs 2.93 GHz). The A4-4000 uses the Richland (2013−2014) architecture (32 nm), while the Core 2 Duo E7500 uses Wolfdale (2008−2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A4-4000 scores 1,152 against the Core 2 Duo E7500's 1,157 — a 0.4% lead for the Core 2 Duo E7500. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	A4-4000	Core 2 Duo E7500
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	3.2 GHz+244%	0.93 GHz
Base Clock	3 GHz+2%	2.93 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	3 MB (total)+200%
Process	32 nm-29%	45 nm
Architecture	Richland (2013−2014)	Wolfdale (2008−2010)
PassMark	1,152	1,157
Geekbench 6 Single	348	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-4000 uses the FM2 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core 2 Duo E7500 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the A4-4000 versus DDR3-1066 on the Core 2 Duo E7500 — the A4-4000 supports 25% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A4-4000 supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 8 (A4-4000) vs 16 (Core 2 Duo E7500) — the Core 2 Duo E7500 offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: A55,A75,A85X,A88X (A4-4000) and G31,P35,G41 (Core 2 Duo E7500).

Feature	A4-4000	Core 2 Duo E7500
Socket	FM2	LGA775
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+173%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333+25%	DDR3-1066
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB+300%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	8	16+100%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4-4000) vs None (Core 2 Duo E7500). The A4-4000 includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 7480D), while the Core 2 Duo E7500 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-4000 targets Budget Desktop. Direct competitor: A4-4000 rivals Celeron G1610.