AMD A10-5800K vs Intel Core i5-3210M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The data splits these two processors cleanly by workload type, and the split is not kind to the AMD A10-5800K. In the only two head-to-head benchmark comparisons available, the Intel Core i5-3210M takes both wins. That means for every measured task, from lightly threaded work to fully threaded workloads, the Intel part comes out ahead.

The Intel Core i5-3210M wins the multi-core test by a narrow margin. In Geekbench multi-core, the Intel scores 1116 against the AMD's 1102, a delta of 1.3% in Intel's favor. That is effectively a tie for heavily threaded workloads, but it is still a win. For tasks that can use all available threads, such as video encoding, compilation, or rendering, the two parts should feel near-identical, with the Intel chip holding a slight edge.

The bigger story is single-core performance. The Intel Core i5-3210M wins the Geekbench single-core test by a substantial 22.7%, scoring 587 versus the AMD's 454. This is the kind of gap that changes real-world behavior in everyday applications. Web browsing, office productivity, light photo editing, and most games rely heavily on single-thread performance, and here the Intel part has a commanding lead. The AMD A10-5800K cannot compensate for this deficit with its extra physical cores, because the benchmark results show that its multi-core advantage, if any, simply does not materialize.

Looking at the broader database averages, both processors sit in the same performance tier. The AMD A10-5800K has an average benchmark score of 778, while the Intel Core i5-3210M averages 758. That puts the AMD part about 2.6% ahead on average across all recorded tests, though the direct head-to-head results tell a different story. The AMD's average is buoyed by its four physical cores, which help it in some multi-threaded tasks not captured in the head-to-head set. However, the only direct comparisons available show Intel winning both.

The percentile rankings reinforce this picture. The AMD A10-5800K sits at the 21st percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the Intel Core i5-3210M sits at the 20th percentile. These are nearly identical positions, which means both chips are entry-level performers by modern standards. Neither part is going to impress in heavily threaded modern workloads, but the Intel part has clearly better single-thread responsiveness.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies and different foundries. The AMD A10-5800K is built on the Piledriver architecture, codenamed Trinity, using a 32 nm process from GlobalFoundries. The Intel Core i5-3210M uses the Ivy Bridge architecture on a 22 nm process from Intel's own fabs. The process node difference is significant: 22 nm versus 32 nm gives Intel an advantage in power efficiency and transistor density, which shows up directly in the thermal and power specifications.

The transistor counts tell a story of design priorities. The AMD A10-5800K packs 1,303 million transistors into a 246 mm² die. The Intel Core i5-3210M does not have a listed transistor count in the database, but its die size is 118 mm², less than half the AMD's. That smaller die on a more advanced process is why Intel can deliver competitive performance with far lower power consumption.

Core configuration differs substantially. The AMD A10-5800K has 4 physical cores and 4 threads, with no simultaneous multithreading. The Intel Core i5-3210M has 2 physical cores and 4 threads, using Hyper-Threading to present two logical cores per physical core. Despite having half the physical core count, the Intel part still wins the multi-core benchmark, which says a great deal about the efficiency of the Ivy Bridge cores versus Piledriver cores.

Cache layouts reflect the different architectures. The AMD A10-5800K has 192 KB of L1 cache and 4 MB of shared L2 cache, with no L3 cache at all. The Intel Core i5-3210M has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 3 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part's L3 cache helps with repeated access patterns and inter-core communication, while the AMD part relies entirely on its larger L2 pool.

Clock speeds are radically different. The AMD A10-5800K runs at a 3.80 GHz base clock and boosts to 4.20 GHz. The Intel Core i5-3210M runs at 2.50 GHz base and 3.10 GHz boost. The AMD's clocks are over 1 GHz higher, yet it still loses the single-core test by 22.7%. This is a stark demonstration that clock speed alone does not determine performance, and the Ivy Bridge architecture delivers more work per clock cycle than Piledriver.

Integrated graphics also differ. The AMD A10-5800K pairs its CPU cores with a Radeon HD 7660D, which is a desktop-class integrated GPU. The Intel Core i5-3210M includes Intel HD 4000 graphics. Both support dual-channel DDR3 memory, and the AMD has a listed memory bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s while the Intel part has no bandwidth figure in the database.

The AMD A10-5800K has an unlocked multiplier, making it overclockable, while the Intel Core i5-3210M has a locked multiplier. The AMD also uses PCIe Gen 2, while the Intel part has no PCIe generation listed. The AMD is a desktop part on Socket FM2, while the Intel is a mobile part on Socket G2 (988B). The AMD carries a 100 W TDP, a very high figure for a processor of this performance class, while the Intel part sips 35 W.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records two direct head-to-head comparisons, and both belong to the Intel Core i5-3210M. There are no benchmark wins recorded for the AMD A10-5800K in this matchup.

The Geekbench multi-core test is the closer of the two. The Intel Core i5-3210M scores 1116, while the AMD A10-5800K scores 1102. The delta is 1.3% in Intel's favor. For a desktop quad-core running at up to 4.20 GHz to be beaten by a 35 W mobile dual-core with Hyper-Threading, this result is telling. The AMD's four physical cores and substantially higher clocks cannot overcome the architectural efficiency of the Ivy Bridge design. In real terms, a user running a multi-threaded workload would see nearly identical performance from either chip, with the Intel part holding a marginal lead.

The Geekbench single-core test is a rout. The Intel Core i5-3210M scores 587, and the AMD A10-5800K scores 454. That is a 22.7% advantage for Intel, which is a massive gap for same-generation parts. This result is the most important number in the entire comparison, because single-thread performance drives the vast majority of everyday computing experiences. The Intel chip's 2.50 GHz base clock and 3.10 GHz boost clock, both far lower than the AMD's 3.80 GHz and 4.20 GHz, still deliver dramatically better single-thread results. The Ivy Bridge core simply executes more instructions per cycle.

These two results explain the average benchmark scores. The AMD A10-5800K averages 778 across its recorded benchmarks, while the Intel Core i5-3210M averages 758. The AMD's average is slightly higher because it includes results from tests not shared in the head-to-head set, likely favoring its extra cores. But when both chips run the exact same tests, the Intel part wins. The average scores place the AMD at the 21st percentile of all CPUs and the Intel at the 20th percentile, which is effectively the same performance class.

The nearest rival data puts both parts in context. The AMD A10-5800K's closest rival is the Intel Pentium G4520 with an identical average score of 778, followed by the AMD Athlon X4 760K at 777, the Intel Pentium Silver J5005 at 776, and the Intel Core i3-7100 at 781. The Intel Core i5-3210M sits near the Core i3-5020U at 757, the Xeon E5450 at 756, the Core i5-4250U at 756, and the Core i3-3240 at 761. Both chips are firmly in entry-level territory, surrounded by low-power mobile parts and budget desktop chips.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous for single-threaded workloads. The Intel Core i5-3210M is the better choice for anyone whose work involves typical desktop applications, web browsing, office software, or anything that does not scale perfectly across many cores. A 22.7% lead in single-core performance is too large to ignore, and it will be felt in daily use. The Intel chip also does this while consuming only 35 W, less than half the AMD's 100 W TDP, and while running at significantly lower clock speeds.

For heavily threaded workloads, the choice is less clear. The AMD A10-5800K has four physical cores and a 2.6% higher average benchmark score, but it loses the direct multi-core head-to-head by 1.3%. The Intel part's Hyper-Threading effectively compensates for its two physical cores. A user who runs only heavily threaded applications, such as video transcoding or 3D rendering, would find both chips very similar, with the Intel part holding a slight edge in the recorded data. The AMD's advantage in average score comes from tests outside the head-to-head set, so it should not be overinterpreted.

The power draw is a decisive factor for system builders. The AMD A10-5800K requires a 100 W thermal envelope, which means a larger cooler and more system heat. The Intel Core i5-3210M, as a mobile part, needs only 35 W. In a desktop build, the Intel chip would be far easier to cool quietly, and in a laptop or compact system, the AMD part is simply not an option given its desktop socket and power requirements.

The AMD A10-5800K does have an unlocked multiplier, which allows overclocking beyond its 4.20 GHz boost clock. Enthusiasts who are willing to invest in substantial cooling could potentially close some of the single-thread gap, but the architecture deficit is large, and the 100 W TDP means overclocking headroom will be limited by thermals. The Intel chip cannot be overclocked at all.

The practical recommendation from the recorded data: pick the Intel Core i5-3210M for general-purpose computing, lower power consumption, and better single-thread responsiveness. Pick the AMD A10-5800K only if you specifically need four physical cores without multithreading, want an unlocked multiplier for tuning, or require the desktop-class Radeon HD 7660D integrated graphics, and you are building a desktop system where 100 W of heat is acceptable. For most users, the Intel part is the better engineering choice.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has better single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i5-3210M wins the Geekbench single-core test with a score of 587 against the AMD A10-5800K's 454, a 22.7% advantage for Intel.

Q: How do the two chips compare in multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i5-3210M wins the Geekbench multi-core test 1116 to 1102, a margin of 1.3%. The AMD has four physical cores while the Intel has two cores with four threads.

Q: Which processor consumes less power?

A: The Intel Core i5-3210M has a 35 W TDP, while the AMD A10-5800K has a 100 W TDP. The Intel part uses less than half the power.

Q: Can the AMD A10-5800K be overclocked?

A: Yes, the AMD A10-5800K has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel Core i5-3210M has a locked multiplier and cannot be overclocked.

Q: What are the integrated graphics in each processor?

A: The AMD A10-5800K includes Radeon HD 7660D graphics, while the Intel Core i5-3210M includes Intel HD 4000 graphics.

Q: Are these processors in the same performance class overall?

A: The average benchmark scores are close, 778 for the AMD A10-5800K and 758 for the Intel Core i5-3210M, placing them at the 21st and 20th percentiles of all CPUs respectively.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD A10-5800K | Intel Core i5-3210M |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 4 | 2 |

| Threads | 4 | 4 |

| Base clock | 3.80 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.20 GHz | 3.10 GHz |

| TDP | 100 W | 35 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FM2 | Intel Socket G2 (988B) |

| Architecture | Piledriver | Ivy Bridge |

| Process node | 32 nm | 22 nm |

| Die size | 246 mm² | 118 mm² |

| L1 cache | 192 KB | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 256 KB (per core) |

| L3 cache | None | 3 MB (shared) |

| Memory bandwidth | 29.9 GB/s | Not listed |

| PCIe | Gen 2 | Not listed |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon HD 7660D | Intel HD 4000 |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Multiplier unlocked | Yes | No |

| Transistors | 1,303 million | Not listed |