A6-4400M vs Athlon X4 730

A6-4400M vs Athlon X4 730 Performance Spectrum

A6-4400M

2 / 2

2,292

+0.6%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Athlon X4 730

4 / 4

2,278

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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.

A6-4400M vs Athlon X4 730 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.

A6-4400M vs Athlon X4 730: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A6-4400M

2012

Why buy it

✅+0.6% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 7520G, while Athlon X4 730 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Athlon X4 730

2012

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,278 vs 2,292).
❌Launch MSRP is still $60 MSRP, while A6-4400M mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while A6-4400M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is A6-4400M better than Athlon X4 730?

Yes. A6-4400M is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.6% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

For gaming, this matchup is basically a tie in the data we have.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A6-4400M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

A6-4400M is still the much better call for a fresh build. A6-4400M comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $60 MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Athlon X4 730 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2012 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (38.0 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on FM2.

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

Athlon X4 730 is the safer long-term CPU choice because it gives you more room to grow and a better platform outlook.

A6-4400M vs Athlon X4 730 Technical Specifications

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

A6-4400M

The A6-4400M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (total). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FS1r2. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: unknown. Passmark benchmark score: 2,292 points. Launch price was $70.

Athlon X4 730

The Athlon X4 730 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L2 cache: 4 MB (total). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1866. Passmark benchmark score: 2,278 points. Launch price was $149.

⚡

Processing Power

The A6-4400M packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Athlon X4 730 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Athlon X4 730 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.2 GHz on the A6-4400M versus 3.2 GHz on the Athlon X4 730 — identical boost frequencies (base: 2.7 GHz vs 2.8 GHz). Both are built on the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture using a 32 nm process. In PassMark, the A6-4400M scores 2,292 against the Athlon X4 730's 2,278 — a 0.6% lead for the A6-4400M.

Feature	A6-4400M	Athlon X4 730
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	3.2 GHz	3.2 GHz
Base Clock	2.7 GHz	2.8 GHz+4%
L3 Cache	0 kB	—
L2 Cache	1 MB (total)	4 MB (total)+300%
Process	32 nm	32 nm
Architecture	Trinity (2012−2013)	Trinity (2012−2013)
PassMark	2,292	2,278
Geekbench 6 Single	313	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A6-4400M uses the FS1r2 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Athlon X4 730 uses FM2 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the A6-4400M versus DDR3-1866 on the Athlon X4 730 — the Athlon X4 730 supports 16.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon X4 730 supports up to 64 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 700% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes.

Feature	A6-4400M	Athlon X4 730
Socket	FS1r2	FM2
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600	DDR3-1866+17%
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	64 GB+700%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (A6-4400M) / not specified (Athlon X4 730). The A6-4400M includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 7520G), while the Athlon X4 730 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A6-4400M targets Budget Laptop. Direct competitor: A6-4400M rivals Core i3-2370M.