CPU Comparison

The Intel Core i3-8145U and AMD A10-9700E are both 25th-percentile performers in the global CPU database, but they achieve that standing through very different means. The Intel part is a 2-core/4-thread mobile processor built on a 10 nm process, while the AMD part is a 4-core/4-thread desktop chip on a 28 nm process. Despite the AMD chip’s additional physical cores, the benchmark data shows a consistent and decisive advantage for the Intel processor in every single test conducted, with margins ranging from 15.6% to 16%. This analysis breaks down exactly where each chip wins, what the scores mean in context, and which user should choose which.

Where Each One Wins

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i3-8145U wins all five head-to-head benchmark comparisons, while the AMD A10-9700E wins none. This is not a narrow victory; the Intel part leads by nearly identical margins across every workload. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i3-8145U scores 322 against the A10-9700E’s 278, a 15.8% advantage. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the gap is 1342 versus 1160, a 15.7% edge. The single-core tests tell the same story: R20 single-core shows 189 versus 163 (16% ahead), and R23 single-core shows 451 versus 390 (15.6% ahead).

The Intel chip’s wins are not concentrated in one type of workload. It dominates both multi-threaded rendering and single-threaded performance, which is notable given that the AMD part has twice the physical core count. The A10-9700E’s four Excavator cores cannot overcome the architectural efficiency of Intel’s Whiskey Lake design, even though the Intel part is constrained to two cores with Hyper-Threading. The AMD chip’s best showing is in multi-core R15, where it gets closest to the Intel part, but it still trails by a substantial margin.

Where the AMD A10-9700E might appear to have a theoretical advantage is in its physical core count and higher base clock. The A10-9700E runs at a 3.00 GHz base and 3.50 GHz boost, compared to the i3-8145U’s 2.10 GHz base and 3.90 GHz boost. However, the benchmark results indicate that raw clock speed and core count do not translate into performance wins. The Intel chip’s higher boost clock, combined with its newer architecture, delivers superior results across the board. The A10-9700E also has a 35 W TDP versus the i3-8145U’s 15 W TDP, meaning the AMD part consumes more power while delivering less performance in these tests.

The Verdict

The data supports only one conclusion for performance-focused users: the Intel Core i3-8145U is the superior processor in every measured benchmark. Anyone prioritizing Cinebench rendering performance, whether single-core or multi-core, should choose the Intel part. The i3-8145U is 15.6% to 16% faster than the A10-9700E across all five tests, a consistent and significant margin that leaves no ambiguity.

Mobile users benefit doubly from the Intel chip. It delivers higher scores while operating within a 15 W TDP, which is less than half of the AMD part’s 35 W TDP. This makes the i3-8145U a more efficient choice for laptops and compact systems where thermal headroom and battery life matter. The AMD A10-9700E, as a desktop part with a 35 W TDP, requires more cooling and power delivery for less performance.

The only scenario where the A10-9700E could be justified is if a user specifically requires a desktop AM4 socket platform and cannot use a mobile BGA 1528 chip. The AMD part also has 3,100 million transistors on a 250 mm² die, compared to the Intel part’s unspecified transistor count, but this does not translate into any benchmark advantage. For raw performance, efficiency, and single-thread responsiveness, the Intel Core i3-8145U is the clear winner. The A10-9700E’s active production status and the i3-8145U’s end-of-life status may matter for long-term availability, but the performance data gives no reason to prefer the AMD part.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest margin of victory for the Intel Core i3-8145U comes in Cinebench R20 single-core, where it scores 189 against the A10-9700E’s 163, a 16% advantage. This test is particularly telling because it isolates the architectural efficiency of each core. The Intel part’s Whiskey Lake core, running at a 3.90 GHz boost, outpaces the AMD Excavator core at a 3.50 GHz boost by a wide margin. This suggests that the Intel core has a significantly higher instructions-per-clock (IPC) throughput, as the clock speed difference alone (0.40 GHz) cannot explain a 16% score gap.

In multi-core workloads, the Intel part’s advantage holds steady at around 15.7%. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i3-8145U scores 3196 versus the A10-9700E’s 2762, a 15.7% lead. This is remarkable because the AMD chip has four physical cores, while the Intel chip has only two physical cores with four threads. The Intel part’s two cores, with Hyper-Threading, outperform the AMD part’s four full cores in a heavily multi-threaded render workload. This indicates that the AMD Excavator architecture is severely limited in per-core throughput, and the extra cores cannot compensate.

The Cinebench R15 multi-core test shows the smallest absolute gap, with Intel at 322 and AMD at 278, a 15.8% delta. This is consistent with the other multi-core results, confirming that the margin is stable across different Cinebench versions. The R20 multi-core test shows 1342 versus 1160, a 15.7% delta, and the R23 single-core test shows 451 versus 390, a 15.6% delta. Across all five tests, the Intel part wins by a margin that never dips below 15.6% and never exceeds 16%, demonstrating remarkable consistency in the performance gap.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more physical cores?

A: The AMD A10-9700E has 4 physical cores, while the Intel Core i3-8145U has 2 physical cores. Both processors support 4 threads total.

Q: What is the performance difference in single-core benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core i3-8145U leads by 16% in Cinebench R20 single-core (189 versus 163) and by 15.6% in Cinebench R23 single-core (451 versus 390).

Q: Does the AMD chip’s higher base clock help it win any tests?

A: No. Despite a 3.00 GHz base clock versus the Intel chip’s 2.10 GHz base clock, the AMD A10-9700E loses all five head-to-head benchmarks.

Q: How do the multi-core scores compare?

A: The Intel Core i3-8145U wins multi-core tests by 15.7% to 15.8%. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 3196 versus the AMD chip’s 2762.

Q: Which processor has a lower thermal design power?

A: The Intel Core i3-8145U has a 15 W TDP, while the AMD A10-9700E has a 35 W TDP. The Intel part delivers higher performance with less than half the power budget.

Q: Are these processors in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both are in the 25th percentile of all CPUs. Their average benchmark scores are close, with the Intel part at 941 and the AMD part at 951, but the head-to-head Cinebench tests show a consistent Intel advantage.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i3-8145U is built on Intel’s 10 nm process using the Whiskey Lake architecture, specifically the Whiskey Lake-U codename. It features 2 cores and 4 threads, with a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. The cache hierarchy includes 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3 cache. It supports DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The processor is designed for mobile use, fitting the Intel BGA 1528 socket, and integrates UHD Graphics 620. It has 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes and a 15 W TDP. The chip was released on 2018-09-30 and is now end-of-life, with a launch MSRP of $281. It does not support ECC memory and has a locked multiplier.

The AMD A10-9700E uses the Excavator architecture under the Bristol Ridge codename, built on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It has 4 cores and 4 threads, with a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 3.50 GHz. The cache is structured differently: 320 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2, with no L3 cache. It supports DDR4 memory in dual-channel mode with the same 38.4 GB/s bandwidth as the Intel part. The AMD chip is a desktop processor for the AMD Socket AM4, integrates Radeon R7 graphics, and has 8 PCIe Gen 3 lanes. It has a 35 W TDP, which is more than double the Intel part’s power draw. The die is 250 mm² and contains 3,100 million transistors. It was released on 2017-07-26 and remains in active production. It does not support ECC memory and has a locked multiplier.

The most significant architectural difference is the absence of L3 cache on the AMD part, combined with a much older 28 nm process node. The Intel chip’s 4 MB of shared L3 cache likely contributes to its superior single-core performance, as does the newer 10 nm process. The AMD part’s higher transistor count and larger die size reflect its older, less efficient design. The Intel chip also has twice the PCIe lanes (16 versus 8), which could matter for expansion in mobile platforms. The memory bandwidth is identical at 38.4 GB/s, but the Intel part achieves much higher scores with the same bandwidth, indicating better memory controller efficiency. Both processors lack ECC support and unlocked multipliers, so overclocking is not an option for either.