AMD A10-7860K vs AMD PRO A10-8770E Comparison
AMD A10-7860K
PRO A10-8770E
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: AMD A10-7860K vs AMD PRO A10-8770E
The AMD A10-7860K and AMD PRO A10-8770E are both 4-core, 4-thread desktop parts with integrated Radeon R7 graphics, but they split their benchmark wins decisively: the A10-7860K dominates Cinebench tests with margins between 8.1% and 8.6%, while the PRO A10-8770E counters with substantial Geekbench leads of 14.6% (multi-core) and 21.9% (single-core). The data shows the A10-7860K as the stronger choice for sustained multi-threaded rendering workloads, while the PRO A10-8770E offers superior performance in memory-sensitive and single-threaded tasks, alongside a much lower 35W TDP compared to 65W.
FAQ
Q: Which CPU has a higher average benchmark score?
A: The AMD A10-7860K has an average benchmark score of 904, while the AMD PRO A10-8770E scores 895. Both CPUs sit at the 24th percentile of all CPUs, placing them in the same performance tier overall.
Q: How do the two compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core performance?
A: The A10-7860K scores 2778 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 8.5% ahead of the PRO A10-8770E's 2560. This is one of the five benchmark wins for the A10-7860K.
Q: What is the biggest single benchmark margin between the two?
A: The largest margin is in Geekbench single-core, where the PRO A10-8770E scores 572 versus the A10-7860K's 447, a 21.9% advantage. The PRO A10-8770E also wins Geekbench multi-core with 1291 versus 1103, a 14.6% gap.
Q: Do both processors use the same socket?
A: No. The A10-7860K is built for AMD Socket FM2+, while the PRO A10-8770E uses AMD Socket AM4. This makes them incompatible with the same motherboards.
Q: Which CPU has a higher base clock speed?
A: The A10-7860K has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz. The PRO A10-8770E operates at a base of 2.80 GHz and boosts to 3.50 GHz.
Q: What are the nearest rivals for each CPU based on average score?
A: The A10-7860K's closest rival is the Intel Core i7-940 at a 0.1% delta, while the PRO A10-8770E's nearest rival is the Intel Core i5-5300U at a 0% delta. Both CPUs also sit near the Intel Core i5-4258U and Intel Core i3-6100 respectively.
The Verdict
The benchmark data tells a clear split story. The AMD A10-7860K is the pick for users running Cinebench-heavy workloads — rendering, 3D modeling, or any multi-threaded CPU stress test — because it wins all five Cinebench comparisons with consistent margins around 8.5%. Its 4.00 GHz boost clock and 4 MB L2 cache appear to give it a decisive edge in these scenarios. For those prioritizing lower power consumption, the PRO A10-8770E's 35W TDP is nearly half of the A10-7860K's 65W, making it the obvious choice for compact or energy-conscious builds.
Conversely, the AMD PRO A10-8770E is the winner for Geekbench-style workloads, which often reflect real-world single-threaded responsiveness and memory throughput. Its 21.9% single-core Geekbench lead over the A10-7860K is substantial, and its multi-core Geekbench advantage of 14.6% shows it handles certain parallel tasks better despite lower clock speeds. The PRO A10-8770E also uses DDR4 memory with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth versus the A10-7860K's DDR3 at 34.1 GB/s, which likely contributes to its Geekbench success. Additionally, the PRO A10-8770E remains in active production, while the A10-7860K is end-of-life.
In short: choose the A10-7860K for pure Cinebench rendering performance and an unlocked multiplier; choose the PRO A10-8770E for lower power draw, newer memory support, and stronger Geekbench scores.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The A10-7860K wins five of seven head-to-head benchmarks, all in the Cinebench suite. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 279 versus 258 for the PRO A10-8770E, an 8.1% win. The margin grows slightly in Cinebench R20 multi-core (1166 vs 1075, an 8.5% delta) and holds steady in Cinebench R23 multi-core (2778 vs 2560, also 8.5%). Single-core Cinebench results show the same pattern: the A10-7860K leads by 8.6% in both R20 (164 vs 151) and R23 (392 vs 361). These consistent margins indicate a fundamental advantage in the A10-7860K's architecture for Cinebench's rendering engine.
The PRO A10-8770E's two wins come in Geekbench, where it reverses the trend decisively. In Geekbench multi-core, it scores 1291 against the A10-7860K's 1103, a 14.6% advantage. The single-core gap is even larger: 572 versus 447, representing a 21.9% lead. Notably, the PRO A10-8770E's Geekbench multi-core score of 1291 exceeds the A10-7860K's Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 2778 relative to their respective averages, suggesting the PRO part's memory bandwidth and newer architecture pay off in Geekbench's mixed workload. The average benchmark scores reflect this split: 904 for the A10-7860K and 895 for the PRO A10-8770E, a difference of only 1%, even though individual tests swing by double digits.
Specification Differences
The two CPUs diverge on nearly every major specification. The A10-7860K has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and boost clock of 4.00 GHz, while the PRO A10-8770E runs at 2.80 GHz base and 3.50 GHz boost. Power draw favors the PRO A10-8770E significantly: 35W TDP versus 65W for the A10-7860K. Socket compatibility is entirely different — the A10-7860K uses AMD Socket FM2+, while the PRO A10-8770E uses AMD Socket AM4.
Cache configurations also differ. The A10-7860K has 256 KB L1 cache and 4 MB L2 cache, while the PRO A10-8770E has a larger 320 KB L1 but only 2 MB L2. Memory support moves from DDR3 (34.1 GB/s bandwidth) on the A10-7860K to DDR4 (38.4 GB/s) on the PRO A10-8770E. Both use dual-channel memory buses and lack ECC support. The A10-7860K lists PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the PRO A10-8770E has PCIe Gen 3 without a lane count specified. The A10-7860K has an unlocked multiplier and is end-of-life, while the PRO A10-8770E is locked and remains in active production. Transistor counts differ notably: 2,411 million for the A10-7860K versus 3,100 million for the PRO A10-8770E, with die sizes of 245 mm² and 250 mm² respectively.
Architecture Differences
The A10-7860K is built on the Steamroller architecture under the Godaveri codename, while the PRO A10-8770E uses the Excavator architecture under the Carrizo codename. Both are manufactured on a 28 nm process by GlobalFoundries, but the Excavator design packs 3,100 million transistors into a 250 mm² die, compared to 2,411 million transistors in a 245 mm² die for Steamroller. This 689 million transistor difference explains why the PRO A10-8770E can achieve higher Geekbench scores despite lower clock speeds — Excavator is a more refined microarchitecture.
The cache hierarchy reflects architectural changes: the PRO A10-8770E has 320 KB L1 cache versus 256 KB on the A10-7860K, but the A10-7860K counters with 4 MB L2 versus 2 MB on the PRO part. Neither CPU has L3 cache. The integrated graphics are identical in branding — both use Radeon R7 — but the underlying GPU performance is not benchmarked in this data. Memory controller differences are significant: the PRO A10-8770E supports DDR4 with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the A10-7860K is limited to DDR3 at 34.1 GB/s. Socket changes from FM2+ to AM4 reflect the newer platform generation for the PRO A10-8770E.
Where Each One Wins
The AMD A10-7860K wins in Cinebench-dominated workloads. All five Cinebench tests — R15 multi-core, R20 multi-core and single-core, R23 multi-core and single-core — go to this chip with margins between 8.1% and 8.6%. This makes it the better choice for users running rendering software, video encoding pipelines, or any application that scales with Cinebench's multi-threaded scoring. Its higher 4.00 GHz boost clock and larger 4 MB L2 cache are the likely drivers of this advantage. The unlocked multiplier also allows overclocking, which could extend its lead further in these scenarios.
The AMD PRO A10-8770E wins in Geekbench-oriented tasks. Its Geekbench single-core score of 572 is 21.9% higher than the A10-7860K's 447, indicating superior per-thread performance in memory-latency-sensitive and integer-heavy workloads. Its multi-core Geekbench win of 1291 versus 1103 (14.6%) shows it can also handle parallel tasks efficiently when they do not rely on the Cinebench rendering engine. The PRO A10-8770E's advantages are amplified by its 38.4 GB/s DDR4 memory bandwidth and newer Excavator architecture. For users prioritizing low power draw, its 35W TDP is a decisive factor — it delivers comparable average scores (895 vs 904) while consuming nearly half the power. The PRO A10-8770E is also the only one of the two still in active production, making it the more practical choice for new system builds on the AM4 platform.