AMD A8-7650K vs Intel Core i5-3380M Comparison

The Intel Core i5-3380M and AMD A8-7650K are two very different processors aimed at different segments, yet their benchmark results place them in a similar performance class. The data shows a clear split: AMD wins the majority of Cinebench workloads, while Intel takes decisive wins in Geekbench, particularly in single-core tests. The A8-7650K edges out the i5-3380M in overall average benchmark score (860 vs. 838) and holds a slightly higher percentile ranking (23rd vs. 22nd), but the nature of the wins matters more than the totals.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD A8-7650K claims victory in five of the seven recorded head-to-head tests, with its advantages in Cinebench being consistent but modest. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the A8-7650K scores 266 against the i5-3380M's 252, a delta of -5.3% (the negative value indicates the AMD part leads). The pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multicore (1111 vs. 1051, -5.4%) and Cinebench R23 multicore (2647 vs. 2504, -5.4%). Even in single-core Cinebench tests, the AMD part holds a lead: R20 single-core shows 156 vs. 148 (-5.1%), and R23 single-core shows 373 vs. 353 (-5.4%). These are narrow margins, all between 5.1% and 5.4%, suggesting the AMD architecture handles Cinebench's rendering workload slightly better across the board.

The Intel Core i5-3380M fights back in Geekbench, and here the wins are far more pronounced. In Geekbench single-core, the i5-3380M scores 505 against the A8-7650K's 421, a commanding 20% advantage. This is the largest delta in the entire head-to-head set. In Geekbench multicore, the Intel part wins by a slim margin: 1055 vs. 1048, a 0.7% lead. So while AMD sweeps the Cinebench suite, Intel demonstrates superior per-thread performance in the Geekbench workload, which is often more sensitive to clock speed and IPC.

The overall score picture reflects this split. The i5-3380M's average benchmark score is 838, while the A8-7650K averages 860. The nearest rival data for the Intel part shows it trading blows with the Intel Core i5-5200U (838, delta 0.1%) and the Intel Xeon X3450 (837, delta 0.1%), while the AMD part sits close to the Intel Core i7-4500U (859, delta 0.1%) and the Intel Xeon W3520 (862, delta -0.2%). The A8-7650K's 2.6% average score advantage over the i5-3380M is real, but the benchmark-specific outcomes tell a more nuanced story.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD A8-7650K wins in rendering and multi-threaded compute workloads. All five Cinebench tests, which stress sustained multi-core and single-core rendering pipelines, favor the AMD part. The margins are consistent, around 5%, which indicates a stable architectural advantage in this specific workload type. This makes the A8-7650K the better choice for users running Cinebench-style rendering tasks, video encoding, or any application that scales across four physical cores.

The Intel Core i5-3380M wins decisively in Geekbench single-core performance, with a 20% lead over the A8-7650K. This is a significant gap that will show up in everyday responsiveness, application launch times, and lightly threaded tasks like web browsing, office productivity, or legacy software that relies on one or two strong cores. The Intel part also edges out the AMD chip in Geekbench multicore (1055 vs. 1048), though by less than 1%, meaning the Intel part's two cores with Hyper-Threading (four threads total) can keep pace with AMD's four physical cores in this particular test.

The data suggests a workload-dependent choice. For heavily threaded rendering, the A8-7650K's four cores deliver a modest but reliable advantage. For single-threaded performance and general snappiness, the i5-3380M's architecture is clearly superior, as evidenced by the 20% single-core Geekbench gap.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core i5-3380M is built on Intel's 22 nm process (Ivy Bridge architecture) with a die size of 118 mm². It has 2 physical cores and 4 threads via Hyper-Threading, with a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 3.60 GHz. Its cache hierarchy is split: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 3 MB shared L3 cache.

The AMD A8-7650K uses GlobalFoundries' 28 nm process (Steamroller architecture, codenamed Kaveri) with a substantially larger die at 245 mm² and 2,411 million transistors. It has 4 physical cores and 4 threads (no SMT), with a base clock of 3.30 GHz and a boost clock of 3.80 GHz. The cache layout is different: 256 KB L1, 4 MB L2, and no L3 cache at all.

These architectural choices explain the benchmark behavior. AMD's larger die and higher transistor count (2,411 million vs. no figure listed for Intel) allow for four full cores, which helps in Cinebench's multi-threaded tests. Intel's smaller die and higher clock-per-core efficiency likely drive the 20% single-core Geekbench advantage. The absence of L3 cache on the AMD part is notable, but the larger L2 (4 MB vs. 256 KB per core) partially compensates.

The process node difference (22 nm Intel vs. 28 nm AMD) also matters. Intel's smaller node typically allows for higher frequency per watt, which is reflected in the i5-3380M's 35W TDP versus the A8-7650K's 95W TDP. The AMD part draws far more power but uses it to feed four physical cores.

Specification Differences

The key specification differences between these two CPUs are stark. The i5-3380M is a mobile processor on Intel Socket G2 (988B), while the A8-7650K is a desktop part on AMD Socket FM2+. The i5-3380M has 2 cores and 4 threads; the A8-7650K has 4 cores and 4 threads. Base clocks differ: 2.90 GHz for Intel vs. 3.30 GHz for AMD. Boost clocks differ: 3.60 GHz vs. 3.80 GHz, respectively.

TDP is a major differentiator: the i5-3380M draws 35W, while the A8-7650K consumes 95W. This over 2.7x power difference is critical for mobile use versus desktop use. The i5-3380M has a multiplier lock, while the A8-7650K has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. The Intel part supports DDR3 memory on a dual-channel bus; the AMD part also supports DDR3 dual-channel, but with a rated memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s (Intel's bandwidth is not listed).

Integrated graphics differ: the i5-3380M has Intel HD 4000, while the A8-7650K has Radeon R7. The AMD part also lists PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel part's PCIe configuration is not specified. The release dates are separated: the i5-3380M launched in late 2012 (2012-12-31), while the A8-7650K arrived in early 2015 (2015-01-06). The AMD part is marked end-of-life, while the Intel part's production status is not listed.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has more physical cores?

A: The AMD A8-7650K has 4 physical cores, while the Intel Core i5-3380M has 2 physical cores. Both support 4 threads total, but Intel uses Hyper-Threading to reach that number.

Q: How much faster is the Intel chip in single-core Geekbench?

A: The i5-3380M scores 505 in Geekbench single-core versus the A8-7650K's 421, giving Intel a 20% lead in that specific test.

Q: Does the AMD chip win all Cinebench tests?

A: Yes. In all five recorded Cinebench tests (R15 multicore, R20 multicore, R20 single-core, R23 multicore, R23 single-core), the A8-7650K scores higher, with margins between 5.1% and 5.4%.

Q: What is the TDP difference between these two CPUs?

A: The i5-3380M has a TDP of 35W, while the A8-7650K has a TDP of 95W. The AMD part draws significantly more power.

Q: Which CPU has an unlocked multiplier?

A: The AMD A8-7650K has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking. The Intel Core i5-3380M's multiplier is locked.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each?

A: The i5-3380M averages 838 across its benchmark suite, while the A8-7650K averages 860. The AMD chip holds a 2.6% higher average score.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear but context-dependent recommendation. The AMD A8-7650K is the pick for users who prioritize multi-threaded rendering and compute workloads. Its four physical cores deliver consistent 5% wins across all Cinebench tests, and its higher average score (860 vs. 838) confirms this advantage. The unlocked multiplier adds flexibility for overclocking, though the 95W TDP demands adequate cooling and power delivery. This is a desktop part for users who know they will run heavily threaded applications.

The Intel Core i5-3380M is the choice for mobile users or those who value single-threaded performance above all else. The 20% lead in Geekbench single-core (505 vs. 421) is the single biggest performance gap in this comparison, and it will translate to snappier everyday use, faster application launches, and better performance in lightly threaded software. The 35W TDP makes it suitable for laptops and compact systems where power draw and heat are primary concerns.

The Geekbench multicore result (1055 vs. 1048, a 0.7% Intel lead) shows that the i5-3380M's two cores with four threads can nearly match the A8-7650K's four physical cores in that workload. This suggests the Intel architecture is more efficient per thread, which is a strong argument for its mobile positioning. The A8-7650K's wins in Cinebench, however, indicate that rendering workloads favor raw core count over per-thread efficiency.

For a desktop builder with a Socket FM2+ motherboard and a willingness to manage 95W of heat, the A8-7650K offers better rendering performance and overclocking headroom. For a laptop user or someone building a low-power system, the i5-3380M delivers superior single-core performance at less than half the TDP. The percentile rankings (22nd for Intel, 23rd for AMD) show these are both entry-level performers by modern standards, but within that class, the choice hinges on workload: rendering favors AMD, responsiveness favors Intel.