CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 4670K vs 7850K


Benchmark performance using all cores

Cinebench R10 32-bit, Passmark, GeekBench (32-bit) and GeekBench (64-bit)

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

Cinebench R10 32-bit (1-core) and Passmark (Single Core)


How much speed can you get out of the processor?



Are you paying a premium for performance?

Performance Per Dollar

CPUBoss Score

Performance, Single-core Performance, Overclocking and Value

Intel Core i5 4670K 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i5 4670K  based on its .

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!

Intel Core i5 4670K

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Core i5 4670K

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i5 4670K

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 4670K

Report a correction
Significantly newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 28 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score 2,210 vs 1,577 More than 40% better PassMark (Single core) score
Better geekbench (64-bit) score 12,728 vs 7,102 Around 80% better geekbench (64-bit) score
Significantly better cinebench r10 32Bit 1-core score 7,335 vs 4,273 More than 70% better cinebench r10 32Bit 1-core score
Better PassMark score 7,669 vs 5,609 More than 35% better PassMark score
Better cinebench r10 32Bit score 25,519 vs 14,027 More than 80% better cinebench r10 32Bit score
Better performance per watt 12.26 pt/W vs 10.11 pt/W More than 20% better performance per watt
Front view of AMD A10 7850K

Reasons to consider the
AMD A10 7850K

Report a correction
Significantly 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
Higher clock speed 3.7 GHz vs 3.4 GHz Around 10% higher clock speed
Higher turbo clock speed 4 GHz vs 3.8 GHz More than 5% higher turbo clock speed
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 4x more l2 cache per core
Supports trusted computing Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing
Lower typical power consumption 52.81W vs 68.25W Around 25% lower typical power consumption
Newer Jan, 2014 vs Apr, 2013 Release date 9 months later
Lower annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year vs 73.58 $/year Around 25% lower annual commercial energy cost
Lower annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year vs 20.24 $/year Around 25% lower annual home energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i5 4670K vs A10 7850K

GeekBench (32-bit)

Core i5 4670K
A10 7850K

GeekBench (64-bit)

Core i5 4670K
A10 7850K

Cinebench R10 32-Bit

Core i5 4670K
A10 7850K
Core i5 4670K A10 7850K @ anandtech.com

Cinebench R10 32-Bit (Single Core)

A10 7850K
Core i5 4670K A10 7850K @ anandtech.com

Passmark (Single Core)

A10 7850K

Specifications Full list of technical specs


Core i5 4670K  vs
A10 7850K 
Clock speed 3.4 GHz 3.7 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.8 GHz 4 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core
Is unlocked Yes Yes
Is hyperthreaded No No


Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
Supplemental SSE3
AVX 2.0
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC No No
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 34,133.32 MB/s


Core i5 4670K  vs
A10 7850K 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 1 MB 4 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 28 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Operating temperature Unknown - 72.72°C Unknown - 72.4°C

integrated graphics

Label Intel® HD Graphics 4600 Radeon™ R7 Series

power consumption

TDP 84W 65W
Annual home energy cost 20.24 $/year 15.66 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 73.58 $/year 56.94 $/year
Performance per watt 12.26 pt/W 10.11 pt/W
Typical power consumption 68.25W 52.81W
Intel Core i5 4670K
Report a correction
AMD A10 7850K
Report a correction


Showing 9 comments.
without a dedicated graphics card, amd 7850k wins miles over intel i5
The AMD's R7 250-based IGPU will be better. It's even about 3% faster than the Iris Pro 5200 in gaming.
Being a gamer I will still go with Intel, especially since emulators require such ridiculous power per core. However I love the direction AMD is moving towards, in a few years there really won't be a reason to pick intel once AMD's IPC is "good enough" and their integrated video is also "good enough". For mid to high end gaming.
at Micro Cneter Here is Ohio they have the A10 7050K for 149.99 and get 30$ off on a selective motherboard with the I5 4670K they have it for 179.99 and 30$ to 40$ on selective Motherboards i went with the I5 because i have always used AMD so i wanted to Change up the Computer this time and try a Intel and so far i like them both it now just depends on what you price range is and who you like the most i thing about 10 year i will just build a new Computer and use all AMD
might not be gpuboss, but since they both have integrated graphics it is important to show which is better with gaming also
errrm...this kinda isn't gpuboss
Graphic benchmark test ?
And remember the A10 uses the new HSA Tech. so to really see what it can do you can't really rely on these same old run of the mill pick and choose benchmarks anymore
Where's the price for the A-10? Odd....
comments powered by Disqus