Intel Core i5 3470 vs AMD A6 5200

older Released June, 2012

Reasons to buy the Intel Core i5 3470

	Much better 3DMark06 CPU score 56.3		Much higher turbo clock speed 3.6 GHz
	Significantly higher clock speed 3.2 GHz		Much better CompuBench 1.5 face detection score 4.6 mPixels/s

older Released May, 2013

Reasons to buy the AMD A6 5200

	Significantly more l2 cache 2 MB		Much lower typical power consumption 20.31W
	Much better performance per watt 9.41 pt/W		Significantly higher Maximum operating temperature 90 °C

When comparing the Intel Core i5 3470 and the AMD A6 5200, one thing quickly became obvious and that’s the fact that the Intel core is just better than the competitor by AMD.

Even though the A6 has a much lower power consumption, annual energy cost and a much higher performance-per-watt rating, the i5 just has much more of everything else. To start with: the i5 cores clock at 3.5GHz to the 2GHz of the A6, but not only that. The manufacturing process of the i5 is much newer, which means more refined, and it also has much higher overclock speed on both air and water. The i5 also scores higher on a variety of test and benchmarks.

So the conclusion is, yes, the Intel Core i5 3470 is better than the AMD A6 5200, as the sheet below, and the information in it, confirms.

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

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 3470

Report a correction

Much better 3DMark06 CPU score

56.3

26.4

Around 2.2x better 3DMark06 CPU score

Much higher turbo clock speed

3.6 GHz

0 GHz

Compared to all cpus, 3.6 GHz turbo clock speed is just OK

Significantly higher clock speed

3.2 GHz

2 GHz

More than 60% higher clock speed

Much better CompuBench 1.5 face detection score

4.6 mPixels/s

3.36 mPixels/s

More than 35% better CompuBench 1.5 face detection score

More l3 cache

6 MB

None

Compared to all cpus, 6 MB l3 cache is just OK

Newer manufacturing process

22 nm

28 nm

A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor

Much better PassMark (Single core) score

1,906

778

Around 2.5x better PassMark (Single core) score

Much better overclocked clock speed (Air)

3.67 GHz

2 GHz

Around 85% better overclocked clock speed (Air)

Better PassMark score

6,607

2,403

Around 2.8x better PassMark score

Higher GPU clock speed

650 MHz

600 MHz

Around 10% higher GPU clock speed

Much better overclocked clock speed (Water)

4.09 GHz

2 GHz

More than 2x better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Reasons to consider the
AMD A6 5200

Report a correction

Significantly more l2 cache

2 MB

1 MB

2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later

Much lower typical power consumption

20.31W

86.05W

4.2x lower typical power consumption

Much better performance per watt

9.41 pt/W

4.41 pt/W

Around 2.2x better performance per watt

Significantly higher Maximum operating temperature

90 °C

67.4 °C

Around 35% higher Maximum operating temperature

Much lower annual home energy cost

6.02 $/year

31.22 $/year

5.2x lower annual home energy cost

More l2 cache per core

0.5 MB/core

0.25 MB/core

2x more l2 cache per core

Much lower annual commercial energy cost

21.9 $/year

84.62 $/year

3.9x lower annual commercial energy cost

Newer

May, 2013

Jun, 2012

Release date 11 months later

CompuBench 1.5 (Bitcoin mining) Data courtesy CompuBench

Core i5 3470

3.08 mHash/s

A6 5200

19 mHash/s

CompuBench 1.5 (T-Rex) Data courtesy CompuBench

Core i5 3470

0.67 fps

A6 5200

0.51 fps

PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated Data courtesy FutureMark

Core i5 3470

2,580

A6 5200

1,790

Sky Diver Data courtesy FutureMark

Core i5 3470

1,055

A6 5200

1,486

Cloud Gate Data courtesy FutureMark

Core i5 3470

3,118

A6 5200

2,476

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i5 3470

9,436

A6 5200

3,330

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i5 3470

2,983

A6 5200

1,061

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core i5 3470

2,470,000 MB/s

A6 5200

982,400 MB/s

summary	Core i5 3470	A6 5200
Clock speed	3.2 GHz	2 GHz
Turbo clock speed	3.6 GHz	0 GHz
Cores	Quad core	Quad core
Is unlocked	No	No
features
Has a NX bit	Yes	Yes
Has virtualization support	Yes	Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
F16C
MMX
SSE4
AVX
SSE3
SSE
BMI1
AMD64
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling	Yes	Yes
power consumption
TDP	77W	25W
Annual home energy cost	31.22 $/year	6.02 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost	84.62 $/year	21.9 $/year
Performance per watt	4.41 pt/W	9.41 pt/W
Typical power consumption	86.05W	20.31W

details	Core i5 3470	A6 5200
Architecture	x86-64	x86-64
Threads	4	4
L2 cache	1 MB	2 MB
L2 cache per core	0.25 MB/core	0.5 MB/core
L3 cache	6 MB	None
Manufacture process	22 nm	28 nm
Max CPUs	1	1
Operating temperature	Unknown - 67.4°C	Unknown - 90°C
overclocking
Overclocked clock speed	3.67 GHz	2 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water)	4.09 GHz	2 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air)	3.67 GHz	2 GHz
integrated graphics
GPU	GPU	GPU
Label	Intel® HD Graphics 2500	Radeon™ HD 8400
Latest DirectX	11.0	11.1
GPU clock speed	650 MHz	600 MHz
memory controller
Memory controller	Built-in	Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1600
DDR3L-1600
DDR3-1333
DDR3

Intel Core i5 3470

Report a correction

AMD A6 5200

Report a correction

AMD A6 5200 vs Intel Core i3 3220

Comments

Showing 15 comments.

Guest (05:19 PM, November 6, 2020)

<a href="https://hitesti.com/compare/cpu/intel-core-i5-3470-vs-amd-a6-5200">https://hitesti.com/compare/cpu/intel-core-i5-3470-vs-amd-a6-5200</a>

atg (05:29 PM, March 8, 2017)

How does this work? AMD score is higher than the Intel score but the review says the intel chip is the clear winner in everything?

Nicholas (01:28 AM, November 28, 2015)

$494? That's for a FULL COMPUTER. That processor is dirt cheap, you can get a motherboard + processor combo for only $80, http://www.amazon.com/dp/B00G237LNS/?tag=fin040-processors-20.

Carlos (06:11 AM, August 26, 2015)

hey, thanks man. Best regards.

Raul Alexander (06:24 AM, October 20, 2014)

nuh m8 dont be upset plz

booger (01:05 PM, October 15, 2014)

an APU put out for low end laptops net books and mini-itx subsystems vs a full blown desktop CPU....crackheads comparing mismatches and bragging about results.

Homo Trollicus (07:06 AM, October 14, 2014)

You DO know that it only uses that much power when under load? Otherwise it's about 5-8W for the whole processor package in idle (at least with a 4.0ghz i5-3550) with iGPU on. With dedicated video card, it's less. And it can be easily cooled with a passive air cooler. And, yeah, the performance is... heh, AMD, really?

Raul Alexander (10:26 PM, September 23, 2014)

One thing that you forgot to say Cpuboss is that the AMD processor has a much better Integrated graphics :)

Raul Alexander (10:23 PM, September 23, 2014)

The funny thing is that if the Intel was the less energy consumer it would have won against the AMD like it always does on this page.

Raul Alexander (10:16 PM, September 23, 2014)

Bro are you kidding me? I can run those programs with an Intel Celeron dual core t1400 with Intel 965 express chipset on my laptop! It will run those programs really really good!! expect the best :D i would recommend having at least 4gb of ram to use vegas. i have 2gb and vegas gets laggy sometimes.

Guest (02:45 PM, May 24, 2014)

I believe, as a home user I can't notice any difference

Carlos (01:39 AM, May 6, 2014)

HEllo, do yu think this processor with amd 8400 video card will run programs such as corel draw, photoshop, vegas?

Guest (11:35 PM, April 18, 2014)

Although I doubt that Intel/MS skewed the reviews, I like the idea that the AMD product is more energy efficient. I've done some side-by-side comparisons and although the clock speeds differ, while doing comparable applications, I could not see any significant difference. I'm probably going to go with AMD this time around although I've zilch against Intel or MS EXCEPT that it irks the blazes out of me that I have to sign into my own machine with 8, 8.1.

Peter (10:57 PM, January 23, 2014)

What about the fact the the MS C++ Compiler deliberately builds more effective code when it detects GenuineIntel processes? Very bias article probably indirectly funded my Intel/MS.

Guest (11:57 PM, December 28, 2013)

So... I believe for everyday home use in this case - AMD is clear winner! And with that power consumption AMD will last... and last... and last... and last....

	VS
$180		$168
Intel Core i5 3470 vs 3570

	VS
$180		$205
Intel Core i5 3470 vs 2400

	VS
$180		$240
Intel Core i5 3470 vs i7 3770

	VS
$180		$305
Intel Core i5 3470 vs i7 2600

	VS
$180		$125
Intel Core i5 3470 vs i3 3220

	VS
$180		$300
Intel Core i5 3470 vs 2500

	VS
$180		$190
Intel Core i5 3470 vs 4460

	VS
$305		$300
Intel Xeon W3520 vs Core i5 2500

	VS
$272		$350
Intel Core i7 4790K vs 6700K

	VS
$281
Intel Core i5 4200U vs AMD A8 6410

	VS
$275		$161
Intel Core i3 4005U vs Pentium N3540

	VS
$281
Intel Core i5 6200U vs AMD A9 7th Gen A9-9410

	VS
$248		$230
Intel Core i7 4770K vs AMD FX 9590

	VS
$250		$350
Intel Core i5 6600K vs i7 6700K

Intel Core i5 3470 vs AMD A6 5200