AMD A10-9700 vs Intel Core i5-6350HQ Comparison

The Intel Core i5-6350HQ and the AMD A10-9700 are both end-of-life quad-core processors, but they target fundamentally different platforms and deliver clearly separated performance tiers. In every single benchmark recorded in the data, the Intel chip wins decisively, posting consistent margins of roughly 20% across both single-core and multi-core workloads. Despite the AMD part’s higher base and boost clocks, the i5-6350HQ’s architectural advantage proves insurmountable, making it the clear choice for raw compute, while the A10-9700’s only notable edge is its platform availability and memory bandwidth.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i5-6350HQ wins all five recorded head-to-head comparisons, with the AMD A10-9700 failing to secure a single victory. The most significant margin comes in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the i5 scores 364 against the A10’s 302, a 20.5% lead. That gap is nearly identical in Cinebench R20 multi-core, with Intel at 1518 versus AMD’s 1261, a 20.4% difference. The multi-core trend continues in Cinebench R23, where the i5 posts 3616 against the A10’s 3004, again a 20.4% advantage. These results show that when all four cores are engaged, the Intel part delivers roughly one-fifth more throughput than the AMD chip, a substantial and consistent margin.

Single-core performance tells the same story, though the scale is smaller. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i5-6350HQ scores 214 versus the A10-9700’s 178, a 20.2% lead. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the scores are 510 and 424 respectively, a 20.3% advantage for Intel. Notably, the AMD A10-9700 has no single-core score recorded for Cinebench R15 in the data, but the available comparisons are enough to establish a pattern. The Intel chip’s single-core advantage is just as pronounced as its multi-core lead, which suggests that the underlying architecture is simply more efficient at executing instructions per clock. Even though the AMD part runs at a higher base clock (3.50 GHz versus 2.30 GHz) and a higher boost clock (3.80 GHz versus 3.20 GHz), it cannot overcome the Intel design’s superior per-clock performance.

The average benchmark scores reinforce the head-to-head results. The i5-6350HQ has an average benchmark score of 1046, placing it in the 29th percentile of all CPUs. The A10-9700 averages 1034, putting it in the 28th percentile. While the percentile difference is only one point, the average score gap of 12 points reflects the consistent advantage Intel holds across all tested workloads. The nearest rivals data for each chip also puts the performance gap in context. The i5-6350HQ sits next to the AMD PRO A10-8770 (delta 0%), the AMD Athlon X4 950 (delta -0.1%), and the AMD PRO A10-9700 (delta 0.1%). The A10-9700, meanwhile, sits next to the AMD A10-7890K (delta -0.1%), the AMD A12-9800E (delta 0.1%), and the AMD A8-7680 (delta -0.2%). Both chips occupy similar overall performance territory, but the head-to-head data shows the i5 is consistently the stronger of the two.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-6350HQ wins in every measurable performance category. In multi-core workloads, it is ahead by 20.4% in both Cinebench R20 and R23, and by 20.5% in Cinebench R15. This makes it the better choice for any task that scales across all four cores, such as video encoding, 3D rendering, or compiling code. The i5 also leads in single-core workloads, with a 20.2% margin in Cinebench R20 and a 20.3% margin in Cinebench R23. This gives it an edge in applications that rely heavily on a single thread, such as older games or lightly threaded productivity tools.

The AMD A10-9700’s only wins are not in raw compute but in platform-level specifications. It supports DDR4 memory with a higher rated bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, compared to the i5’s 34.1 GB/s. It also uses the AMD Socket AM4, which is a desktop platform, whereas the i5 uses Intel BGA 1440, which is a mobile socket. The A10-9700 has a larger L1 cache (320 KB versus 64 KB per core) and a larger L2 cache (2 MB versus 256 KB per core), though it has no L3 cache at all, while the i5 has 6 MB of shared L3. For a user building a desktop system on a standard AM4 motherboard, the A10-9700 offers a more conventional upgrade path, but the benchmark results show that this platform flexibility does not translate into better compute performance.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two chips is stark. The Intel Core i5-6350HQ is built on a 14 nm process at Intel’s foundry, using the Skylake architecture (codename Skylake-H). It integrates 2,300 million transistors on a 171 mm² die. The AMD A10-9700, in contrast, uses GlobalFoundries’ 28 nm process and the Excavator architecture (codename Bristol Ridge), packing 3,100 million transistors onto a 250 mm² die. The larger process node and die size explain why the AMD chip has a higher TDP of 65 watts, while the Intel chip draws only 45 watts despite delivering more performance.

The cache hierarchies differ substantially. The i5-6350HQ has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The A10-9700 has 320 KB of L1 cache total, 2 MB of L2 cache total, and no L3 cache at all. The Intel chip’s shared L3 cache is likely a significant factor in its superior multi-core performance, as it allows all four cores to access a large pool of fast memory. The AMD chip relies on its larger L1 and L2 caches, but without a unified L3, it may suffer from higher latency when cores need to share data.

Memory support is another differentiator. The i5-6350HQ supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a peak bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. The A10-9700 supports only DDR4 in dual-channel, but with a higher peak bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The AMD chip also has fewer PCIe lanes: 8 Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, compared to the i5’s 16 Gen 3 lanes. This could limit expansion options on the AMD platform. Integrated graphics also differ, with the i5 featuring Intel Iris Pro 580 and the A10-9700 featuring Radeon R7 graphics.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core i5-6350HQ is faster in all multi-core tests. It scores 364 in Cinebench R15, 1518 in R20, and 3616 in R23, versus the AMD A10-9700’s 302, 1261, and 3004. The Intel lead is consistently around 20.4-20.5%.

Q: Does the AMD A10-9700 have any performance advantage?

A: No. The AMD chip loses all five head-to-head benchmark comparisons. Its only advantages are platform-level, such as higher memory bandwidth (38.4 GB/s versus 34.1 GB/s) and a desktop Socket AM4 instead of a mobile BGA socket.

Q: How do the clock speeds compare?

A: The AMD A10-9700 has a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 3.80 GHz. The Intel i5-6350HQ has a base clock of 2.30 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz. Despite the AMD chip’s higher clocks, it loses every benchmark.

Q: What is the difference in power consumption?

A: The Intel i5-6350HQ has a TDP of 45 watts, while the AMD A10-9700 has a TDP of 65 watts. The Intel chip delivers higher performance while consuming less power.

Q: Which processor has more cache?

A: The AMD A10-9700 has 320 KB of L1 cache and 2 MB of L2 cache, but no L3 cache. The Intel i5-6350HQ has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the process node difference?

A: The Intel i5-6350HQ is built on a 14 nm process, while the AMD A10-9700 uses a 28 nm process. The Intel chip also has a smaller die size (171 mm²) and fewer transistors (2,300 million) compared to the AMD chip (250 mm² and 3,100 million).

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion: the Intel Core i5-6350HQ is the superior processor for any compute-intensive task. It wins every benchmark by a margin of approximately 20%, across both single-core and multi-core workloads. The i5-6350HQ achieves this while consuming less power (45 watts TDP versus 65 watts) and using a more advanced 14 nm process node. Its 6 MB of shared L3 cache and 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes give it additional architectural advantages over the AMD part.

The AMD A10-9700 is only the better choice in scenarios where the platform matters more than raw performance. It uses the standard Socket AM4, which is a desktop socket, and supports DDR4 memory with a higher peak bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. For a user with an existing AM4 motherboard who needs a basic quad-core processor, the A10-9700 is a functional option. However, the benchmark results show that any workload that benefits from CPU compute will be significantly faster on the i5-6350HQ. The i5’s 29th percentile ranking versus the A10’s 28th percentile is a small overall difference, but the head-to-head margins are decisive. If performance is the priority, the Intel chip wins without qualification.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-6350HQ | AMD A10-9700 |

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

| Base Clock | 2.30 GHz | 3.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.20 GHz | 3.80 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1440 | AMD Socket AM4 |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 2,300 million | 3,100 million |

| Die Size | 171 mm² | 250 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 320 KB |

| L2 Cache | 256 KB (per core) | 2 MB |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | None |

| Memory Support | DDR3, DDR4 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 34.1 GB/s | 38.4 GB/s |

| PCIe Lanes | Gen 3, 16 Lanes | Gen 3, 8 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel Iris Pro 580 | Radeon R7 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Launch MSRP | $306 | Not available |