AMD A8-7670K vs Intel Core i5-4288U Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a consistent pattern across every Cinebench test recorded in the database: the AMD A8-7670K wins all five head-to-head comparisons. The margins are unusually uniform, with four tests showing a 22.7% advantage and one test showing a 22.9% advantage for the AMD part.

Starting with Cinebench R15 multi-core, the A8-7670K scores 276 against the Core i5-4288U's 225, a 22.7% lead. That same exact delta repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the AMD chip posts 1152 versus 939. The single-core results tell the same story: in Cinebench R20 single-core, the A8-7670K scores 162 compared to 132, again a 22.7% gap. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 2745 for the AMD part versus 2237 for the Intel part, and the R23 single-core test shows 387 versus 315, a 22.9% margin.

What stands out is that the AMD processor wins by the same proportion in both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads. That is unusual, because competing designs often trade blows depending on thread count. Here, the A8-7670K's lead is essentially flat across all tested scenarios. The consistency suggests the advantage comes from a fundamental per-core performance difference rather than from having twice the physical core count.

The aggregate benchmark score reinforces this picture. The A8-7670K has an average benchmark score of 944, while the Core i5-4288U sits at 927. That is a narrow overall gap of roughly 1.8%, but it is notably the head-to-head Cinebench tests show a much larger spread. The reason becomes clear when comparing each chip to its nearest rivals in the database. The A8-7670K sits between the Intel Core i3-1110G4 (945 average score, 0.1% higher) and the AMD Athlon X4 860K (943, 0.1% lower). The Core i5-4288U, meanwhile, sits between the Intel Core i7-870 (928, 0.1% higher) and the Intel Celeron G6900TE (925, 0.3% lower).

Both processors land at the 25th percentile among all CPUs in the database. That means they occupy the same overall performance tier, even though the A8-7670K wins every direct comparison. The explanation is that the database's average benchmark score pulls from a broader set of tests, and the Core i5-4288U has additional Geekbench results that the AMD part lacks. Specifically, the Intel chip scores 1745 in Geekbench multi-core and 896 in Geekbench single-core, tests that are not recorded for the A8-7670K. Those extra data points likely drag its aggregate score upward relative to the Cinebench-only results.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: if the workload is Cinebench rendering, the AMD A8-7670K is the stronger processor by roughly 23% in every recorded test. That is a substantial margin for any CPU comparison. The AMD part wins single-threaded and multi-threaded tests alike, which means it is not a niche victory; it is a general performance advantage.

The Core i5-4288U does have one advantage in the recorded data: it appears to be the more efficient mobile part. The TDP figures tell that story, with the AMD chip rated at 95 watts against the Intel chip's 28 watts. But the benchmark database does not include any power efficiency tests, so the practical impact of that TDP difference on real-world thermals or battery life is not quantified here.

For a desktop user building or upgrading a Socket FM2+ system, the A8-7670K is the clear choice based on raw performance. It also has an unlocked multiplier, which means frequency tuning is possible without changing the board. For a mobile user or anyone constrained by power delivery, the Core i5-4288U is the only realistic option, since the AMD part is a desktop chip with a 95 watt TDP and a socket that does not fit portable chassis.

The production status is worth noting: the A8-7670K is marked as end-of-life, while the Core i5-4288U's production status is not recorded. That means the AMD chip may be harder to source new, but the benchmark data does not comment on availability or price.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design eras and different process nodes. The AMD A8-7670K uses the Steamroller architecture on a 28 nm process from GlobalFoundries, with the codename Godaveri. The Intel Core i5-4288U uses the Haswell architecture on a 22 nm process from Intel's own fabs. The transistor counts reflect that difference: the AMD chip packs 2,411 million transistors on a 245 mm² die, while the Intel chip uses 1,400 million transistors on a 118 mm² die. The Intel die is roughly half the size, which aligns with its much lower TDP.

Core counts differ as well. The A8-7670K has four physical cores and four threads, while the Core i5-4288U has two physical cores and four threads via Hyper-Threading. The AMD chip also has an unlocked multiplier, whereas the Intel chip is locked. The cache layouts are structured differently: the AMD part has 256 KB of L1 and 4 MB of L2, with no L3 cache listed. The Intel part has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 3 MB of shared L3 cache.

Memory support is similar in type: both use DDR3. The AMD chip has a dual-channel memory bus with a bandwidth rating of 34.1 GB/s. The Intel chip's memory bus width and bandwidth are not recorded in the database. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The AMD chip includes a Radeon R7 iGPU, while the Intel chip includes Intel HD 5100. The database does not include any graphics benchmarks, so the relative performance of these iGPUs is not measured here.

The sockets are incompatible: the A8-7670K uses AMD Socket FM2+, while the Core i5-4288U uses Intel BGA 1168. The mobile BGA socket means the Intel part is soldered to the board, not upgradeable. The PCIe configuration also differs, with the AMD chip supporting PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Intel chip's PCIe details are not recorded.

Release dates are far apart. The A8-7670K launched in July 2015, while the Core i5-4288U launched in June 2013. That two-year gap explains the newer process technology on the Intel side, though it did not translate into a performance advantage in the recorded tests.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core Cinebench tests?

A: The AMD A8-7670K wins all three multi-core tests recorded. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 276 versus 225. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, it scores 1152 versus 939. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 2745 versus 2237.

Q: Is the single-core performance advantage the same as the multi-core advantage?

A: Yes, nearly identical. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the A8-7670K scores 162 versus 132, a 22.7% lead. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 387 versus 315, a 22.9% lead. This matches the 22.7% multi-core margins.

Q: How do these chips compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The A8-7670K has an average benchmark score of 944, placing it just 0.1% below the Intel Core i3-1110G4 (945) and 0.1% above the AMD Athlon X4 860K (943). The Core i5-4288U has an average score of 927, placing it 0.1% below the Intel Core i7-870 (928) and 0.3% above the Intel Celeron G6900TE (925).

Q: Which processor has more physical cores?

A: The AMD A8-7670K has four physical cores and four threads. The Intel Core i5-4288U has two physical cores and four threads. Despite the core count difference, the AMD chip wins both single-threaded and multi-threaded tests.

Q: Can either processor be overclocked?

A: The AMD A8-7670K has an unlocked multiplier, so frequency tuning is possible. The Intel Core i5-4288U has a locked multiplier and is not unlocked.

Q: What are the power consumption ratings?

A: The AMD A8-7670K is rated at 95 watts TDP. The Intel Core i5-4288U is rated at 28 watts TDP. The database does not include power efficiency benchmarks, so the real-world impact of this difference is not measured.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD A8-7670K wins every recorded benchmark in the head-to-head comparison. That covers all five Cinebench tests, including both single-core and multi-core variants across R15, R20, and R23. If the workload involves Cinebench rendering, the AMD chip is the pick by a consistent 22.7% to 22.9% margin.

The Intel Core i5-4288U does not win any recorded test, but it has a structural advantage in the form of TDP. At 28 watts versus 95 watts, the Intel part draws substantially less power. That makes it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where cooling and battery capacity are limited. The AMD part, with its 95 watt TDP and Socket FM2+ desktop mounting, is not a portable option.

The Core i5-4288U also has Geekbench results recorded in the database, with a multi-core score of 1745 and a single-core score of 896. The A8-7670K has no Geekbench scores recorded, so any comparison on that workload cannot be made. If Geekbench performance matters, the Intel chip at least has measured data available; the AMD chip's performance there is unknown.

For a desktop builder with a Socket FM2+ board, the A8-7670K is the straightforward recommendation. It wins all rendering tests, has four physical cores, and supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes. For a mobile user, the Core i5-4288U is the only realistic choice given its BGA socket and 28 watt TDP. The data does not support choosing the Intel part for performance reasons, but the power and form-factor constraints are decisive for portable systems.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD A8-7670K | Intel Core i5-4288U |

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

| Cores | 4 | 2 |

| Threads | 4 | 4 |

| Base clock | 3.60 GHz | 2.60 GHz |

| Boost clock | 3.90 GHz | 3.10 GHz |

| TDP | 95 W | 28 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FM2+ | Intel BGA 1168 |

| Architecture | Steamroller | Haswell |

| Process node | 28 nm | 22 nm |

| Transistors | 2,411 million | 1,400 million |

| Die size | 245 mm² | 118 mm² |

| L1 cache | 256 KB | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 4 MB | 256 KB (per core) |

| L3 cache | None listed | 3 MB (shared) |

| Memory type | DDR3 | DDR3 |

| Memory bus | Dual-channel | Not recorded |

| Memory bandwidth | 34.1 GB/s | Not recorded |

| ECC support | No | No |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 16 lanes (CPU only) | Not recorded |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon R7 | Intel HD 5100 |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Production status | End-of-life | Not recorded |

| Release date | July 2015 | June 2013 |

| Multiplier unlocked | Yes | No |

| Part number | AD767KXBJCBOXAD767KXBJCSBXAD767KXBI44JC | SR189 |