CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 3210M vs 4600M among laptop CPUs (over 15W)

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics

Sky Diver and Cloud Gate

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing

CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

7.3

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Core i5 3210M 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i5 3210M  based on its performance and single-core performance.

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Intel Core i5 3210M

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Core i5 3210M

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i5 3210M

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 3210M

Report a correction
Significantly more l3 cache 3 MB vs 1 MB 3x more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
Significantly newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 32 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much better turbo clock speed 1,100 MHz vs 685 MHz More than 60% better turbo clock speed
Higher clock speed 2.5 GHz vs 2.3 GHz Around 10% higher clock speed
Much more l3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 6x more l3 cache per core
Significantly better geekbench 3 single core score 2,547 vs 1,434 Around 80% better geekbench 3 single core score
Higher GPU clock speed 650 MHz vs 496 MHz More than 30% higher GPU clock speed
Better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score 4,949 vs 3,679 Around 35% better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score
Better 3DMark06 CPU score 3,553 vs 2,865.5 Around 25% better 3DMark06 CPU score
Higher Maximum operating temperature 105 °C vs 100 °C 5% higher Maximum operating temperature
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.5 GHz vs 2.3 GHz Around 10% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of AMD A10 4600M

Reasons to consider the
AMD A10 4600M

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 4 MB vs 1 MB 4x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much better sky diver score 2,832 vs 1,802 More than 55% better sky diver score
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Much better PCMark 8 home 3.0 accelerated score 2,610 vs 2,240 More than 15% better PCMark 8 home 3.0 accelerated score
Higher turbo clock speed 3.2 GHz vs 3.1 GHz Around 5% higher turbo clock speed
Significantly better CompuBench 1.5 video composition score 13.64 fps vs 6.84 fps Around 2x better CompuBench 1.5 video composition score
Significantly more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i5 3210M vs A10 4600M

CompuBench 1.5 (Bitcoin mining) Data courtesy CompuBench

Core i5 3210M
6.22 mHash/s
A10 4600M
54.12 mHash/s

CompuBench 1.5 (T-Rex) Data courtesy CompuBench

Core i5 3210M
0.97 fps
A10 4600M
0.62 fps

PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated Data courtesy FutureMark

A10 4600M
2,610

Sky Diver Data courtesy FutureMark

A10 4600M
2,832

Cloud Gate Data courtesy FutureMark

A10 4600M
4,110

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

A10 4600M
3,860

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

A10 4600M
1,434

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i5 3210M
2,090,000 MB/s
A10 4600M
1,670,000 MB/s

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i5 3210M  vs
A10 4600M 
Clock speed 2.5 GHz 2.3 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.1 GHz 3.2 GHz
Cores Dual core Quad core
Is unlocked No No

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
AVX 1.1
SSE2
F16C
MMX
XOP
AVX
SSE3
SSE
CLMUL
AMD64
SSE4.1
FMA4
FMA3
SSE4.2
CVT16
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 35W 35W
Annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year 8.43 $/year
Performance per watt 13.5 pt/W 12.88 pt/W
Typical power consumption 28.44W 28.44W

details

Core i5 3210M  vs
A10 4600M 
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 1 MB 4 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 1 MB/core
L3 cache 3 MB 1 MB
L3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 32 nm
Transistor count 1,400,000,000 1,303,000,000
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 25 23
Operating temperature Unknown - 105°C Unknown - 100°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.89 GHz 2.97 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.5 GHz 2.3 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.89 GHz 2.97 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU GPU
Label HD 4000 Radeon™ HD 7660G
Latest DirectX 11.0 11.0
GPU clock speed 650 MHz 496 MHz
Turbo clock speed 1,100 MHz 685 MHz

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1600
DDR3L-1600
DDR3-1333
DDR3L-1333
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 25,600 MB/s
Intel Core i5 3210M
Report a correction
AMD A10 4600M
Report a correction

Comments

Showing 5 comments.
I have been using laptops with AMD processor for last 6 years...I would say that AMD is best than Intel i3 or i5...Look at the CPUboss score off AMD..but they announced Intel as winner..What the ****...
haha.. damn i have amd apu.. im a loser xD
This website sucks remove it from search results.
Nope, re-read well... it says the general performance is 90% of the Intel... but without looking at the price, and the price is 3.5x less than the Intel!: Much better performance per dollar 7.7 pt/$vs2.21 pt/$ Around 3.5x better performance per dollar
according to this site amd always loser
comments powered by Disqus