A6-4400M vs Core m5-6Y54

A6-4400M vs Core m5-6Y54 Performance Spectrum

A6-4400M

2 / 2

2,292

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core m5-6Y54

2 / 4

2,294

+0.1%

Pentium Dual Core T4400

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 Core m5-6Y54 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 Core m5-6Y54: 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

✅60% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 10) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (313 vs 875).
❌Lower PassMark (2,292 vs 2,294).
❌677.8% higher power demand at 35W vs 4.5W.

Core m5-6Y54

2015

Why buy it

✅+179.6% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅Draws 5W instead of 35W, a 31W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $281 MSRP, while A6-4400M mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Quick Answers

So, is Core m5-6Y54 better than A6-4400M?

Yes. Core m5-6Y54 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.1% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core m5-6Y54 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.9% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core m5-6Y54 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core m5-6Y54 is the better buy right now. Core m5-6Y54 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $281 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (8.2 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Core m5-6Y54 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2015 vs 2012) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A6-4400M vs Core m5-6Y54 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.

Core m5-6Y54

The Core m5-6Y54 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Skylake-Y (2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.1 GHz, with boost up to 2.7 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1515. Thermal design power (TDP): 4.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,294 points. Launch price was $281.

⚡

Processing Power

The A6-4400M packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core m5-6Y54's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 3.2 GHz on the A6-4400M versus 2.7 GHz on the Core m5-6Y54 — a 16.9% clock advantage for the A6-4400M (base: 2.7 GHz vs 1.1 GHz). The A6-4400M uses the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Core m5-6Y54 uses Skylake-Y (2015) (14 nm). In PassMark, the A6-4400M scores 2,292 against the Core m5-6Y54's 2,294 — a 0.1% lead for the Core m5-6Y54. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 313 vs 875, a 94.6% lead for the Core m5-6Y54 that directly translates to higher frame rates. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A6-4400M vs 4 MB (total) on the Core m5-6Y54.

Feature	A6-4400M	Core m5-6Y54
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	3.2 GHz+19%	2.7 GHz
Base Clock	2.7 GHz+145%	1.1 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	4 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB (total)+300%	256 kB (per core)
Process	32 nm	14 nm-56%
Architecture	Trinity (2012−2013)	Skylake-Y (2015)
PassMark	2,292	2,294
Geekbench 6 Single	313	875+180%
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	1,648

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A6-4400M uses the FS1r2 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core m5-6Y54 uses FCBGA1515 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the A6-4400M versus LPDDR3-1866 on the Core m5-6Y54 — the Core m5-6Y54 supports 16.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core m5-6Y54 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (A6-4400M) vs 10 (Core m5-6Y54) — the A6-4400M offers 6 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A6-4400M	Core m5-6Y54
Socket	FS1r2	FCBGA1515
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600	LPDDR3-1866+17%
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	16 GB+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16+60%	10

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A6-4400M) vs VT-x, VT-d (Core m5-6Y54). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 7520G (A6-4400M) and HD Graphics 515 (Core m5-6Y54) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A6-4400M targets Budget Laptop, Core m5-6Y54 targets Enthusiast. Direct competitor: A6-4400M rivals Core i3-2370M; Core m5-6Y54 rivals Pentium Gold 4415Y.