AMD A8-7670K vs Intel Core i7-950 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a consistent, albeit narrow, victory for the Intel Core i7-950 across every recorded Cinebench test. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Intel part scores 280 against 276 for the AMD A8-7670K, a 1.4% advantage. The multicore results in Cinebench R20 follow the same pattern: 1167 for the i7-950 versus 1152 for the A8-7670K, a 1.3% lead. The margin narrows slightly in single-core workloads, where the i7-950 posts 164 in Cinebench R20 single-core versus 162 for the AMD chip, a 1.2% difference. In the newer Cinebench R23 suite, the Intel processor again takes the multicore test with 2780 points against 2745, a 1.3% margin, and the single-core test with 392 versus 387, also a 1.3% margin. The head-to-head tally is decisive in terms of wins: the i7-950 wins all five recorded benchmarks.

Looking at the broader database, the average benchmark score for the Intel Core i7-950 is 957, placing it in the 26th percentile of all CPUs. The AMD A8-7670K averages 944, sitting at the 25th percentile. The average score difference is only 13 points, which is roughly 1.4% of the Intel part's average, a margin that is unlikely to be perceptible in real-world use. The nearest rival for the Intel chip is the AMD Opteron 4386, which matches its 957 average score exactly with a 0% delta. The AMD A8-7670K's closest competitor is the Intel Core i3-1110G4, which scores 945, a 0.1% delta from the A8's 944 average. These figures place both chips in the same performance tier, with the Intel part holding a slight edge in every measured workload.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design eras and philosophies. The Intel Core i7-950 is built on the Nehalem architecture, codenamed Bloomfield, using a 45 nm process node at Intel's own foundry. It integrates 731 million transistors on a 263 mm² die. The AMD A8-7670K uses the Steamroller architecture, codenamed Godaveri, fabricated by GlobalFoundries on a 28 nm process. It packs 2,411 million transistors into a 245 mm² die. The AMD chip's transistor count is more than three times that of the Intel part, despite a smaller physical die, reflecting the denser manufacturing process and the inclusion of an integrated graphics unit.

Threading is a key differentiator. The i7-950 has 4 cores and 8 threads, meaning it can process two threads per core. The A8-7670K has 4 cores and 4 threads, with no simultaneous multithreading support. The Intel part's base clock is 3.07 GHz with a boost clock of 3.33 GHz. The AMD chip runs at a higher base of 3.60 GHz and boosts to 3.90 GHz. Despite the AMD part's higher clock speeds, the Intel chip still wins in all recorded benchmarks, suggesting the extra threads and memory bandwidth compensate for the clock deficit.

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. The Intel i7-950 has 64 KB L1 cache per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and a large 8 MB shared L3 cache. The AMD A8-7670K reports 256 KB total L1 and 4 MB of L2, with no L3 cache present. Memory support for both is DDR3, but the memory bus is different: the Intel part uses triple-channel memory, while the AMD part uses dual-channel. The AMD chip lists a memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s, a figure not provided for the Intel part. PCIe support also differs, with the Intel chip providing PCIe Gen 2 versus PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes on the AMD CPU only. The AMD A8-7670K includes integrated Radeon R7 graphics, while the Intel i7-950 has no integrated graphics at all.

The Intel processor fits the Intel Socket 1366, while the AMD part uses AMD Socket FM2+. The Intel chip's power envelope is 130 W TDP, versus 95 W for the AMD part. The AMD A8-7670K has an unlocked multiplier, the Intel unit is locked. The Intel part was released in 2009, the AMD in 2015. Both are end-of-life products in the database. Neither has ECC memory support.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data shows the Intel Core i7-950 wins every benchmark in the head-to-head set, so the AMD A8-7670K does not hold a single recorded victory. The margin in all cases is small, ranging from 1.2% to 1.4%. The largest edge for the Intel chip comes in Cinebench R15 multicore, where its 280 score beats 276, a 1.4% difference. The smallest edge is in Cinebench R20 single-core, 164 versus 162, a 1.2% gap. For workloads that depend on multithreading, the i7-950's 8 threads provide a consistent but modest advantage over the A8-7670K's 4 threads. For single-threaded tasks, the AMD part's higher base and boost clocks narrow the gap, but the Intel architecture still comes out ahead by a small margin.

The AMD A8-7670K does have attributes that could make it better suited for certain use cases, but these are not reflected in the benchmark scores. It includes Radeon R7 integrated graphics, which the Intel i7-950 lacks entirely, meaning a system built around the AMD chip could operate without a discrete graphics card. The AMD chip also has an unlocked multiplier, allowing for easier overclocking. Its TDP of 95 W is lower than the Intel part's 130 W, which can simplify cooling requirements. The AMD part also has a higher base clock of 3.60 GHz and boost clock of 3.90 GHz, which can help in lightly threaded tasks where the benchmark data shows it nearly matches the Intel chip.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-950 has an average benchmark score of 957, while the AMD A8-7670K averages 944, a 13-point difference.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the head-to-head results?

A: The Intel Core i7-950 wins all five recorded tests, but the margins are small. The deltas range from 1.2% to 1.4% in favor of the Intel chip.

Q: Does the AMD A8-7670K win any benchmark against the Intel Core i7-950?

A: No. The head-to-head data records 5 wins for the Intel Core i7-950 and 0 wins for the AMD A8-7670K.

Q: What are the threading differences between the two chips?

A: The Intel Core i7-950 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the AMD A8-7670K has 4 cores and 4 threads. The Intel part can handle two threads per core.

Q: Does the AMD A8-7670K include integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the AMD A8-7670K includes Radeon R7 integrated graphics. The Intel Core i7-950 has no integrated graphics.

Q: How do the two chips compare in terms of power consumption?

A: The Intel Core i7-950 has a TDP of 130 W, while the AMD A8-7670K has a TDP of 95 W.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i7-950 outperforms the AMD A8-7670K in every recorded benchmark. The margins are small, with the largest being 1.4% in Cinebench R15 multicore and the smallest at 1.2% in Cinebench R20 single-core. The Intel chip's 8 threads give it a consistent edge in multithreaded workloads, while its single-core scores also stay ahead despite the AMD part's higher clock speeds. The average benchmark scores reflect the same ranking, with the i7-950 at 957 and the A8-7670K at 944.

However, the choice is not purely about benchmark scores. The AMD A8-7670K offers integrated Radeon R7 graphics, something the Intel i7-950 lacks entirely. For a system that does not use a discrete graphics card, the AMD chip is the only one of the two that can produce a display output. The AMD part also has an unlocked multiplier for easier overclocking and a lower TDP of 95 W compared to 130 W for the Intel chip. The Intel part's triple-channel memory support could provide an advantage in memory-intensive tasks, but the database does not include memory bandwidth figures for the Intel chip to confirm this. The AMD part lists a memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s.

For a user prioritizing raw CPU performance in the Cinebench workloads recorded, the Intel Core i7-950 is the better choice, even if the advantage is slim. For a user who needs integrated graphics, lower power consumption, or overclocking flexibility, the AMD A8-7670K has clear structural benefits that the benchmark data does not capture. Both processors are end-of-life products, so platform availability and motherboard compatibility will likely play a decisive role. The benchmark data shows the Intel part as the faster CPU, but the AMD part remains viable for specific system configurations.