Intel Core i5 3470 vs AMD A6 5200

older Released June, 2012

Reasons to buy the Intel Core i5 3470

	Significantly higher clock speed 3.2 GHz		Newer manufacturing process 22 nms
	Has a NX bit Yes		Much better PassMark (Single core) score 1,906

Expected September, 2013

Reasons to buy the AMD A6 5200

	Significantly lower typical power consumption 20.31W		Significantly higher Maximum Operating Temperature 90 °C
	More l2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core		Better performance per watt 14.31 pt/W

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.

	Performance
	Benchmark performance using all cores
Core i5 3470 7.8 A6 5200 6.0
3DMark06 (CPU), Passmark and GeekBench

	Single-core Performance
	Individual core benchmark performance
Core i5 3470 8.7 A6 5200 6.4
Passmark (Single Core)

	Power Consumption
	How much power does the processor require?
Core i5 3470 5.1 A6 5200 5.4
TDP

	Value

Core i5 3470 N/A A6 5200 N/A
Performance Per Dollar

No winner declared

Too close to call

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

Significantly higher clock speed

3.2 GHz

2 GHz

More than 60% higher clock speed

Newer manufacturing process

22 nms

28 nms

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

Has a NX bit

Yes

Somewhat common; Prevents a common class of security exploits

Much better PassMark (Single core) score

1,906

707

Around 2.8x better PassMark (Single core) score

Significantly better 3DMark06 CPU score

6,179

2,659.5

More than 2.2x better 3DMark06 CPU score

Significantly better geekbench (32-bit) score

9,261

3,294

More than 2.8x better geekbench (32-bit) score

Significantly better PassMark score

6,607

2,436

Around 2.8x better PassMark score

Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air)

3.82 GHz

2 GHz

More than 90% better overclocked clock speed (Air)

Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water)

3.98 GHz

2 GHz

Around 2x better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Reasons to consider the
AMD A6 5200

Report a correction

Significantly lower typical power consumption

20.31W

86.05W

4.2x lower typical power consumption

Significantly higher Maximum Operating Temperature

90 °C

67.4 °C

Around 35% higher Maximum Operating Temperature

More l2 cache per core

0.5 MB/core

0.25 MB/core

2x more l2 cache per core

Better performance per watt

14.31 pt/W

8.01 pt/W

Around 80% better performance per watt

Much lower annual home energy cost

6.02 $/year

31.22 $/year

5.2x lower annual home energy cost

Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost

21.9 $/year

84.62 $/year

3.9x lower annual commercial energy cost

GeekBench (32-bit)

Core i5 3470

9,261

A6 5200

3,294

browser.primatelabs.com

GeekBench

Core i5 3470

12,141

A6 5200

3,294

3D Mark 06 (CPU)

Core i5 3470

6,179

A6 5200

2,659.5

notebookcheck.net

Passmark

Core i5 3470

6,607

A6 5200

2,436

Core i5 3470 A6 5200 @ cpubenchmark.net

CineBench R11.5 returned a multicore CPU score of 5.67 for the newer CPU and 5.41 for the older one, with an even tighter gap present between the two when we only used one CPU for the test (1.48 for the Core i5-2500K, 1.51 for the Core i5-3470).

Core i5 3470 | by PCMag (May, 2012)

Passmark (Single Core)

Core i5 3470

1,906

A6 5200

707

cpubenchmark.net

summary	Core i5 3470	A6 5200
Clock speed	3.2 GHz	2 GHz
Cores	Quad core	Quad core
Is unlocked	No	No
Is hyperthreaded	No	No
features
Has a NX bit	Yes	No
Has vitualization support	Yes	Yes
Instruction-set-extensions
MMX
SSE
SSE4.2
AVX
SSE3
SSE2
Supplemental SSE3
SSE4.1
SSE4
SSE4a
AES
gpu
GPU	GPU	GPU
Label	Intel® HD Graphics 2500	Radeon™ HD 8400
Latest DirectX	11.0	11.1

details	Core i5 3470	A6 5200
Threads	4	4
L2 cache	1 MB	2 MB
L2 cache per core	0.25 MB/core	0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process	22 nms	28 nms
Max CPUs	1	1
Operating temperature	Unknown - 67.4°C	Unknown - 90°C
overclocking
Overclocked clock speed	3.82 GHz	2 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water)	3.98 GHz	2 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air)	3.82 GHz	2 GHz
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	8.01 pt/W	14.31 pt/W
Typical power consumption	86.05W	20.31W

Intel Core i5 3470

Report a correction

AMD A6 5200

Report a correction

Intel Core i5 3470 vs AMD FX 6300

AMD A6 5200 vs Intel Core i3 3220

Comments

Showing 5 comments.

Alex Metslov (02:45 PM, May 24, 2014)

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

Carlos Torres (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.

Alex Metslov (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
		$125
AMD A6 5200 vs Intel Core i3 3220

	VS
		$225
AMD A6 5200 vs Intel Core i3 3217U

	VS
		$281
AMD A6 5200 vs Intel Core i5 4200U

	VS
		$225
AMD A6 5200 vs Intel Core i3 3110M

	VS
$195		$120
Intel Core i5 3470 vs AMD FX 6300

	VS
$195		$180
Intel Core i5 3470 vs AMD FX 8350

	VS
$195		$195
Intel Core i5 3470 vs 4570

	VS
$313		$334
Intel Core i7 4770K vs AMD FX 9590

	VS
$313		$340
Intel Core i7 4770K vs 4790K

	VS
$313		$195
Intel Core i7 4770K vs 4790

	VS
		$378
AMD A10 5750M vs Intel Core i7 4700MQ

	VS
$180		$235
AMD FX 8350 vs Intel Core i5 4670K

	VS
$281		$393
Intel Core i5 4200U vs i7 4500U

	VS
$281		$225
Intel Core i5 4200U vs 4200M

Intel Core i5 3470 vs AMD A6 5200