A4-4000 vs Core 2 Duo E8200

A4-4000 vs Core 2 Duo E8200 Performance Spectrum

A4-4000

2 / 2

1,152

+0.7%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core 2 Duo E8200

2 / 2

1,144

0.0%

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 E8200 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 E8200: 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

✅+0.7% higher PassMark.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 7480D, while Core 2 Duo E8200 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (348 vs 350).

Core 2 Duo E8200

2008

Why buy it

✅+0.6% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,144 vs 1,152).
❌Launch MSRP is still $163 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 A4-4000 better than Core 2 Duo E8200?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core 2 Duo E8200 is ahead with a 0.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, A4-4000 pulls ahead with 0.7% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A4-4000 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

A4-4000 is still the much better call for a fresh build. A4-4000 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $163 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.7% better PassMark. Core 2 Duo E8200 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2008 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (7.0 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA775.

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 2008) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A4-4000 vs Core 2 Duo E8200 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 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 A4-4000 and Core 2 Duo E8200 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.2 GHz on the A4-4000 versus 2.67 GHz on the Core 2 Duo E8200 — a 18.1% clock advantage for the A4-4000 (base: 3 GHz vs 2.66 GHz). The A4-4000 uses the Richland (2013−2014) architecture (32 nm), while the Core 2 Duo E8200 uses Wolfdale (2008−2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A4-4000 scores 1,152 against the Core 2 Duo E8200's 1,144 — a 0.7% lead for the A4-4000. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 348 vs 350, a 0.6% lead for the Core 2 Duo E8200 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	A4-4000	Core 2 Duo E8200
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	3.2 GHz+20%	2.67 GHz
Base Clock	3 GHz+13%	2.66 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	6 MB (total)+500%
Process	32 nm-29%	45 nm
Architecture	Richland (2013−2014)	Wolfdale (2008−2010)
PassMark	1,152	1,144
Geekbench 6 Single	348	350
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	650

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-4000 uses the FM2 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core 2 Duo E8200 uses LGA775 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the A4-4000 versus DDR2-800 on the Core 2 Duo E8200 — the A4-4000 supports 66.6% 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 0 (Core 2 Duo E8200) — the A4-4000 offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: A55,A75,A85X,A88X (A4-4000) and P35,P45,G33,G45 (Core 2 Duo E8200).

Feature	A4-4000	Core 2 Duo E8200
Socket	FM2	LGA775
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+173%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333+67%	DDR2-800
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB+300%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	8	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4-4000) vs VT-x (Core 2 Duo E8200). The A4-4000 includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 7480D), while the Core 2 Duo E8200 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-4000 targets Budget Desktop, Core 2 Duo E8200 targets Legacy Desktop. Direct competitor: A4-4000 rivals Celeron G1610; Core 2 Duo E8200 rivals Phenom II X2 550.