AMD A10-5800B vs Intel Core i3-3250T Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data does not contain any direct head-to-head test results between these two processors. Instead, the database provides separate benchmark suites for each chip, which allows for indirect comparison through their aggregate scores and percentile rankings.

The AMD A10-5800B holds the higher average benchmark score at 794, while the Intel Core i3-3250T trails slightly with 775. This represents a 2.5% gap in favor of the AMD part based on the database's composite scoring methodology. Both processors land at the 21st percentile among all CPUs tracked in the database, meaning they occupy nearly identical positions in the overall performance hierarchy despite the A10's numerical advantage.

Looking at the specific workloads recorded, the Intel Core i3-3250T was tested across multiple Cinebench iterations. Its Cinebench R15 multi-core score is 226, and it improves to 945 in Cinebench R20 multi-core. The single-core results show 133 in Cinebench R20 and 318 in Cinebench R23. The AMD A10-5800B was instead tested under Geekbench, where it records 1128 in multi-core and 459 in single-core.

The absence of overlapping test suites makes a direct apples-to-apples comparison difficult. However, the database's nearest rival listings provide context for each chip's standing. The Intel part matches the Intel Celeron G5920 exactly with a 0% delta, sits 0.1% behind the Intel Pentium Silver J5005, and trails the AMD Athlon X4 760K by 0.2%. It edges the Intel Core i7-3687U by 0.3%. The AMD part shows a 0.1% deficit against the AMD A6-9400, 0.3% behind the AMD A10-7850K, and 0.3% behind the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1606G, while leading the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 by 0.5%.

These rival clusters reveal that each processor competes in the same performance tier, with the AMD chip positioned slightly higher in aggregate scoring. The A10-5800B's 794 average against the i3-3250T's 775 puts roughly 19 points between them, a margin that exceeds the deltas seen among their nearest rivals but remains modest in absolute terms.

The Cinebench results for the Intel chip demonstrate consistent scaling across versions. The jump from 226 in R15 to 945 in R20 reflects the different scoring scales of those workloads rather than a performance anomaly. The single-core progression from 133 in R20 to 318 in R23 similarly tracks the expected scale differences between those benchmark versions.

For the AMD part, the Geekbench scores show a multi-core to single-core ratio of roughly 2.5 to 1, which is typical for a four-core, four-thread processor with no simultaneous multithreading. The Intel chip, with two cores and four threads, would be expected to show a different scaling pattern in multi-threaded workloads, though no direct Geekbench results are recorded for it in the database.

The percentile placement at 21 for both chips reinforces that these are entry-level desktop processors by modern standards. Their nearest rivals, which include budget Celeron and Pentium parts from Intel alongside older AMD A-series and Athlon chips, all cluster within a narrow performance band. The data suggests that in aggregate terms, neither processor offers a decisive advantage over the other, but the AMD A10-5800B does hold the higher recorded average score.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD A10-5800B records an average benchmark score of 794, compared to 775 for the Intel Core i3-3250T, a difference of approximately 2.5%.

Q: How do these processors compare in single-threaded performance?

A: The only recorded single-core test is Geekbench for the AMD A10-5800B, which scores 459. The Intel Core i3-3250T has single-core Cinebench scores of 133 in R20 and 318 in R23, but no Geekbench result is available for direct comparison.

Q: What is the core and thread configuration of each processor?

A: The Intel Core i3-3250T has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the AMD A10-5800B has 4 cores and 4 threads, meaning the AMD chip has twice the physical core count but no simultaneous multithreading.

Q: Which processor has a higher clock speed?

A: The AMD A10-5800B has a base clock of 3.80 GHz and a boost clock of 4.20 GHz. The Intel Core i3-3250T has a base clock of 3.00 GHz and no boost clock listed.

Q: Are these processors still in production?

A: Both are marked as end-of-life in the database. The Intel Core i3-3250T was released on June 8, 2013, and the AMD A10-5800B was released on October 1, 2012.

Q: How does each processor compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The Intel Core i3-3250T matches the Intel Celeron G5920 with a 0% delta, trails the Intel Pentium Silver J5005 by 0.1%, and the AMD Athlon X4 760K by 0.2%, and beats the Intel Core i7-3687U by 0.3%. The AMD A10-5800B trails the AMD A6-9400 by 0.1%, the AMD A10-7850K by 0.3%, and the AMD Ryzen Embedded R1606G by 0.3%, while leading the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9770 by 0.5%.

Q: What memory bandwidth figures are recorded for each processor?

A: The Intel Core i3-3250T has a memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s, while the AMD A10-5800B records 29.9 GB/s, a difference of approximately 15% in favor of the AMD chip.

Q: What are the integrated graphics solutions does each processor feature?

A: The Intel Core i3-3250T includes Intel HD 2500 graphics, while the AMD A10-5800B uses the Radeon HD 7660D iGPU.

The Verdict

The data points to the AMD A10-5800B as the better choice for users who prioritize raw multi-threaded throughput, based on its 794 average score against the Intel Core i3-3250T's 775. The AMD chip's 4 physical cores at a 3.80 GHz base clock and 4.20 GHz boost give it a structural advantage in workloads that spread across cores, even without multithreading. The Intel part counters with a lower 35 W TDP, a 22 nm process node, and a 3.00 GHz base clock across 2 cores with 4 threads.

For users constrained by power consumption, the Intel Core i3-3250T is the clear pick. Its 35 W TDP is less than half of the AMD's 100 W TDP, making it substantially more efficient for compact desktops or always-on systems. The Intel chip also supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, whereas the AMD part is limited to PCIe Gen 2, which matters for users with newer expansion cards or storage devices.

The AMD A10-5800B offers a more capable integrated graphics solution with the Radeon HD 7660D, which should provide better visual output than the Intel HD 2500 for light gaming or media playback without a discrete GPU. The AMD chip also has a higher memory bandwidth at 29.9 GB/s versus 25.6 GB/s, which benefits memory-sensitive workloads.

Both processors occupy the 21st percentile in the database, confirming they are entry-level parts. The AMD chip's 4 MB of shared L2 cache versus the Intel's 3 MB shared L3 cache reflects different cache architectures, with AMD relying on a larger L2 pool and Intel on a smaller L3 pool. The Intel chip has per-core L1 and L2 caches at 64 KB and 256 KB respectively, while the AMD part provides 192 KB of L1 and 4 MB shared L2.

Users upgrading an existing Socket 1155 system should consider the Intel Core i3-3250T, while those on Socket FM2 platforms would naturally favor the AMD A10-5800B. The data does not include direct head-to-head benchmarks, so users should weigh the recorded scores alongside their specific workload patterns and platform constraints.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification in the database. The Intel Core i3-3250T uses 2 cores and 4 threads, while the AMD A10-5800B uses 4 cores and 4 threads. The Intel chip has a base clock of 3.00 GHz with no boost clock, whereas the AMD part runs at 3.80 GHz base and boosts to 4.20 GHz.

Thermal design power differs significantly: the Intel chip draws 35 W, the AMD chip draws 100 W. The Intel part uses a 22 nm process node from Intel's foundry, while the AMD part uses a 32 nm process from GlobalFoundries. The AMD die is larger at 246 mm² versus 94 mm² for Intel, and AMD lists 1,303 million transistors while Intel does not report a transistor count.

Cache configurations diverge as well. The Intel chip has 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 3 MB shared L3. The AMD chip has 192 KB L1 total, 4 MB shared L2, and no L3 cache. Memory bandwidth favors AMD at 29.9 GB/s versus 25.6 GB/s, though both support DDR3 on dual-channel memory buses.

PCIe support differs: Intel provides PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while AMD provides PCIe Gen 2. The integrated graphics differ, with Intel HD 2500 on the i3-3250T and Radeon HD 7660D on the A10-5800B. Sockets are incompatible, with Intel using Socket 1155 and AMD using Socket FM2. The Intel part was released on June 8, 2013, while the AMD part launched on October 1, 2012. Neither processor has a launch MSRP recorded, and both lack an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i3-3250T is built on the Ivy Bridge architecture, a 22 nm design manufactured by Intel, with a die size of 94 mm². The AMD A10-5800B uses the Piledriver architecture under the Trinity codename, fabricated on a 32 nm process by GlobalFoundries, with a substantially larger die at 246 mm² and 1,303 million transistors.

The core designs reflect different philosophies. Intel uses two cores with Hyper-Threading to reach four threads, while AMD uses four full physical cores without multithreading. The Intel cache hierarchy is split across L1 and L2 per core, with a shared L3 pool of 3 MB. AMD consolidates L2 into a single 4 MB shared pool and omits L3 entirely, relying on the larger L2 to compensate.

The memory subsystems differ in bandwidth, with AMD's 29.9 GB/s exceeding Intel's 25.6 GB/s. PCIe connectivity also diverges, with Intel supporting Gen 3 and AMD limited to Gen 2. The integrated graphics units come from different vendors: Intel HD 2500 versus AMD's Radeon HD 7660D.

The power envelope is a major architectural distinction. Intel's 35 W TDP on 22 nm contrasts sharply with AMD's 100 W TDP on 32 nm, reflecting both the process node advantage and the different core counts. The Intel part is unlocked? No, both multipliers are locked. The Intel part's generation is listed as Core i3 (Ivy Bridge), while AMD's generation is A10 (Trinity).

The release dates place the AMD part first at October 1, 2012, followed by the Intel part on June 8, 2013. Both are marked end-of-life. The Intel chip's part number is SR0YW, and the AMD chip's part number is AD580BWOA44HJ. Neither supports ECC memory.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD A10-5800B wins in aggregate scoring with 794 versus 775, and it holds advantages in core count, clock speed, memory bandwidth, and integrated graphics. Its 4 physical cores at 3.80 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost make it the stronger choice for multi-threaded productivity tasks, provided the system can handle the 100 W TDP. The Radeon HD 7660D integrated graphics and higher 29.9 GB/s memory bandwidth give it an edge for multimedia workloads and light gaming without a discrete GPU.

The Intel Core i3-3250T wins decisively on efficiency with its 35 W TDP, less than half the AMD part's power draw. It also supports newer PCIe Gen 3 connectivity, which benefits modern storage and expansion devices. The 22 nm process node and smaller 94 mm² die indicate a more advanced manufacturing process. Its 4 threads, while fewer than the AMD's 4 physical cores, still provide adequate multithreading for basic desktop workloads, and the 3 MB shared L3 cache offers a different caching tradeoff.

For users building or upgrading a low-power system, the Intel Core i3-3250T is the data-backed choice. For users who need maximum multi-core throughput and better integrated graphics, and who can accommodate higher power consumption, the AMD A10-5800B is the stronger option. The 21st percentile placement for both chips confirms they are entry-level processors, so users should set expectations accordingly. The database does not include direct head-to-head benchmark results, so the final decision rests on which specifications and recorded scores align with the user's platform and workload priorities.