CPU Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data presents a genuinely split picture, with each processor claiming a decisive victory in a different generation of the Cinebench workload. In the older Cinebench R15 multi-core test, the Intel Processor N150 posts a score of 422.5 against the AMD A10-9700's 302, a substantial 28.5% advantage. This is a large margin, indicating that in this particular workload, the Intel part's architecture extracts significantly more throughput from its four cores. The AMD part trails by nearly a third, a gap that would be immediately noticeable in any render or batch-processing scenario built around this benchmark.

However, the narrative flips completely in the newer Cinebench R23 multi-core test. Here, the AMD A10-9700 strikes back with a score of 3004, beating the Intel Processor N150's 2590.5 by a solid 16%. This is a counter-intuitive result at first glance, as newer Cinebench versions typically scale better with more modern instruction sets and memory architectures. The data shows the AMD part's 3.50 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost clocks, combined with its dual-channel memory support, allowing it to pull ahead in this more demanding and sustained workload. The Intel part, with its 6W TDP and single-channel memory bus, appears to hit a performance ceiling that the AMD chip does not encounter.

The most dramatic divergence appears in the single-core Cinebench R23 test. The Intel Processor N150 delivers a score of 935, which is a staggering 54.7% higher than the AMD A10-9700's 424. This is the single largest performance delta in the entire comparison. The Intel part's single-core score is more than double that of its rival, showcasing a massive generational leap in per-core efficiency and IPC. This result is particularly significant because single-core performance remains a critical factor for many everyday applications, from web browsing to office productivity, where workloads are often limited to one or two threads. The AMD A10-9700's Excavator architecture, dating back to a 28 nm process, simply cannot compete with the modern Twin Lake core design in this metric.

Looking at the summary of wins, the Intel Processor N150 takes 2 out of 3 head-to-head benchmarks, winning decisively in both R15 multi-core and R23 single-core. The AMD A10-9700 claims the remaining victory in the R23 multi-core test. The average benchmark scores from the broader database paint a picture of near-total parity: the AMD A10-9700 holds an average score of 1034, while the Intel Processor N150 sits at 1025. This places both processors at the 28th percentile among all CPUs, meaning they perform similarly on average across a wide suite of tests, even though their strengths and weaknesses are starkly different in specific workloads.

The Verdict

The data does not declare a universal winner; it declares two processors with profoundly different performance profiles that happen to average out to the same level. For users whose primary concern is raw multi-threaded rendering in modern workloads, the AMD A10-9700 is the clear choice. Its 16% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core demonstrates that it can handle sustained, heavily threaded tasks with more authority. This is the chip for anyone running the latest version of a renderer, a video encoder, or a scientific computation that uses all available cores and threads.

Conversely, the Intel Processor N150 is the superior processor for single-threaded and legacy multi-threaded performance. Its 54.7% lead in single-core Cinebench R23 is an enormous advantage that will translate to snappier system responsiveness, faster application launch times, and better performance in software that is not well-optimized for multiple cores. Its 28.5% win in Cinebench R15 multi-core also suggests it handles older software workloads more gracefully. The data indicates that the Intel part is the better all-rounder for general desktop use, where single-core performance often dominates the user experience, while the AMD part is the specialist for modern, heavily threaded rendering tasks.

The choice fundamentally comes down to workload priority. If the user's software is modern and scales well across cores, the AMD A10-9700's lead in R23 multi-core makes it the logical pick. If the user's software is legacy, single-threaded, or if they simply want the fastest possible response in everyday tasks, the Intel Processor N150's dominance in single-core and older multi-core tests is the deciding factor. The 28th percentile ranking for both reinforces that they are peers in overall capability, but the head-to-head results show they achieve that parity in entirely different ways.

Where Each One Wins

AMD A10-9700 wins in the modern multi-threaded arena. The R23 multi-core benchmark is the most representative test of current rendering and content-creation software, and the AMD chip's 3004 score versus the Intel's 2590.5 shows a clear 16% advantage. This suggests it is the better choice for users running the latest video editing suites, 3D modeling tools, or any application that has been updated to leverage multiple cores effectively with modern instruction sets. Its higher 65W TDP and dual-channel memory support likely contribute to this sustained performance, allowing it to maintain higher throughput over longer periods.

Intel Processor N150 wins in almost every other category. Its 54.7% lead in R23 single-core is the headline figure, making it the unquestioned winner for any task that relies on a single thread. This includes many legacy applications, older games, and general system responsiveness. Its 28.5% win in R15 multi-core also indicates that for software optimized for older multi-threading paradigms, it is the faster part. This combination of strengths suggests the Intel chip is better for a typical desktop user who runs a mix of office applications, web browsers, and perhaps some older games, where the single-core performance is the bottleneck.

The broader benchmark data adds another dimension. The Intel Processor N150's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-4340 and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U, with score deltas of -0.1% and 0.1% respectively. This places it in the company of older mainstream desktop and mobile processors. The AMD A10-9700's nearest rivals include the Intel Pentium G4560 and the AMD A12-9800E, with deltas of 0.3% and 0.1%. This shows both chips are firmly in the entry-level to mid-range performance class, competing with parts from several generations ago. The data suggests neither chip is a performance leader, and both are best suited for basic computing tasks, with the Intel part having a clear edge in responsiveness and the AMD part having a niche in modern rendering.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Processor N150 is significantly faster. It scores 935 in the Cinebench R23 single-core test, which is 54.7% higher than the AMD A10-9700's score of 424.

Q: Which processor is better for modern multi-threaded rendering?

A: The AMD A10-9700 is better in this specific area. It scores 3004 in the Cinebench R23 multi-core test, beating the Intel Processor N150's score of 2590.5 by 16%.

Q: How do the two processors compare in overall average performance?

A: They are nearly identical. The AMD A10-9700 has an average benchmark score of 1034, while the Intel Processor N150 has an average score of 1025. Both rank at the 28th percentile among all CPUs.

Q: Which processor performs better in the older Cinebench R15 multi-core test?

A: The Intel Processor N150 performs better. It scores 422.5 compared to the AMD A10-9700's 302, giving the Intel part a 28.5% advantage in this legacy workload.

Q: What are the closest rivals to these processors based on average score?

A: The AMD A10-9700's closest rival is the AMD A10-7890K with a score of 1035 (a -0.1% delta). The Intel Processor N150's closest rival is the Intel Core i7-5650U with a score of 1027 (a -0.2% delta).

Q: Do both processors have the same number of cores and threads?

A: Yes, both the AMD A10-9700 and the Intel Processor N150 have 4 cores and 4 threads.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two processors is vast, reflecting a decade of silicon evolution. The AMD A10-9700 is built on the Excavator architecture, codenamed Bristol Ridge, and manufactured on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It is a desktop part on the AMD Socket AM4 platform, with a 65W TDP. In contrast, the Intel Processor N150 uses the Twin Lake architecture, part of the Alder Lake-N generation, and is fabricated on a 10 nm process by Intel. It is a mobile part on the Intel BGA 1264 socket, with an extremely low 6W TDP.

These fundamental differences lead to significant variations in cache and memory architecture. The AMD A10-9700 has 320 KB of L1 cache and 2 MB of L2 cache, but it has no L3 cache at all. It supports dual-channel DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The Intel Processor N150 has a different cache layout, with 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of shared L2 cache, and a substantial 6 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports a wider range of memory types, including DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5, but it operates on a single-channel memory bus, also achieving a bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s.

The integrated graphics and connectivity options also differ. The AMD part integrates a Radeon R7 GPU, while the Intel part features UHD Graphics 730. For PCIe connectivity, the AMD A10-9700 provides Gen 3 with 8 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel Processor N150 provides Gen 3 with 9 lanes. Neither processor supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The production statuses are also distinct: the AMD A10-9700 is end-of-life, having been released in 2017, while the Intel Processor N150 is an active product released in 2024. The transistor count and die size are listed for the AMD part at 3,100 million and 250 mm², but these figures are not provided for the Intel chip.