AMD Athlon X4 840 vs Intel Core i3-6300 Comparison

The Intel Core i3-6300 and AMD Athlon X4 840 occupy nearly identical positions in the overall performance hierarchy, with average benchmark scores of 978 and 975 respectively. Both land at the 26th percentile among all CPUs, and the Athlon X4 840 sits as a direct nearest rival to the Core i3-6300 with a mere 0.3% delta. Yet despite this parity in aggregate scoring, the head-to-head benchmark data tells a strikingly different story: the Core i3-6300 wins all five shared Cinebench tests, with margins ranging from 19% to 19.3%. This suggests that while their average scores converge, their performance profiles diverge significantly depending on the workload.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most consistent pattern across every shared benchmark is the Core i3-6300's decisive lead. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Intel part scores 340 against the AMD's 285, a 19.3% advantage. That same 19.3% delta repeats exactly in Cinebench R20 multi-core (1419 vs 1189) and Cinebench R23 multi-core (3380 vs 2833). The single-core results are nearly as lopsided: Cinebench R20 single-core shows a 19% gap (200 vs 168), and Cinebench R23 single-core again hits 19.3% (477 vs 400).

What is particularly telling is the uniformity of these margins. Whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded, the Core i3-6300 maintains roughly the same 19% advantage. This consistency implies the performance gap is not workload-specific but rather a fundamental throughput difference. The Athlon X4 840 has four physical cores against the Core i3-6300's two, yet it still loses multi-core tests by the same margin as single-core tests. The data suggests that the Intel part's architectural efficiency per thread more than compensates for having half the physical core count.

Notably, the Athlon X4 840 does not win a single one of the five head-to-head benchmarks. The wins tally stands at 5 for Intel and 0 for AMD. Even in the Cinebench R15 single-core test, where the Intel part's score of 52 is its lowest relative showing, the AMD part lacks a comparable published result in the shared test set, so no direct comparison exists there. The available data uniformly favors Intel, and the margins are too large to attribute to run-to-run variance.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies and manufacturing eras. The Intel Core i3-6300 is built on a 14 nm process at Intel's foundry, using the Skylake architecture. It packs 1,400 million transistors into a 150 mm² die. The AMD Athlon X4 840, by contrast, uses a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with the Steamroller architecture (codenamed Kaveri). Its die is substantially larger at 245 mm² and holds 2,411 million transistors.

Core configuration is where the divergence becomes most apparent. The Core i3-6300 offers 2 cores and 4 threads, leveraging Hyper-Threading to double its logical thread count. The Athlon X4 840 provides 4 physical cores and 4 threads, with no simultaneous multithreading. The base clocks differ as well: the Intel part runs at 3.80 GHz with no boost clock, while the AMD part starts at 3.10 GHz and can boost to 3.80 GHz. Interestingly, the AMD's maximum boost clock exactly matches the Intel's fixed base clock.

Cache hierarchies reflect their different origins. The Core i3-6300 has 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, plus 4 MB of shared L3. The Athlon X4 840 lists 256 KB of L1 total and 4 MB of L2 total, with no L3 cache listed at all. Memory support also differs: the Intel part uses DDR4 with dual-channel support and 34.1 GB/s bandwidth, while the AMD part uses DDR3, also dual-channel, with the same 34.1 GB/s bandwidth. Both support PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

The Intel part includes integrated graphics (Intel HD 530), whereas the AMD Athlon X4 840 has no integrated graphics listed. The Core i3-6300 is not multiplier-unlocked, while the Athlon X4 840 is unlocked for overclocking. Production status also differs: the Intel chip is listed as Active, while the AMD chip is End-of-life.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the benchmark data, the Core i3-6300 is the clear winner across all tested scenarios. Its 19.3% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core (3380 vs 2833) indicates that even heavily threaded workloads favor the Intel part, despite its lower physical core count. The single-core results (477 vs 400 in R23, a 19.3% delta) reinforce that the Intel architecture extracts more work from each execution thread.

The Athlon X4 840's only theoretical advantage lies in its unlocked multiplier, which allows overclocking. However, no overclocked benchmark results appear in the data, so any performance gains from overclocking remain speculative. Its four physical cores could potentially benefit workloads that scale perfectly with core count and are not memory-bandwidth-limited, but the Cinebench results contradict this hypothesis: the AMD part loses multi-core tests by the same margin as single-core tests.

For users prioritizing out-of-the-box performance, the Core i3-6300 wins every category. For those who value the ability to tweak multipliers and have experience with overclocking, the Athlon X4 840 offers that flexibility, but the benchmark data provides no evidence that it can close the 19% gap even when pushed. The Intel part also includes integrated graphics, which could be decisive for systems without a discrete GPU, while the AMD part requires a separate graphics card.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the Intel Core i3-6300 than the AMD Athlon X4 840 in multi-core workloads?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core i3-6300 scores 3380 versus the Athlon X4 840's 2833, a 19.3% advantage. The same 19.3% delta appears in Cinebench R20 multi-core (1419 vs 1189) and Cinebench R15 multi-core (340 vs 285).

Q: Does the AMD Athlon X4 840's four physical cores give it an advantage in single-threaded tests?

A: No. The Core i3-6300 wins single-threaded tests by nearly identical margins. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 477 against AMD's 400 (19.3% delta). In R20 single-core, the scores are 200 vs 168 (19% delta).

Q: Which processor has a higher base clock speed?

A: The Intel Core i3-6300 has a fixed base clock of 3.80 GHz with no boost. The AMD Athlon X4 840 has a 3.10 GHz base clock that can boost up to 3.80 GHz, matching the Intel part's maximum speed only when boosted.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory type?

A: No. The Intel Core i3-6300 supports DDR4 memory, while the AMD Athlon X4 840 supports DDR3. Both use dual-channel configurations and list the same 34.1 GB/s memory bandwidth.

Q: Can the AMD Athlon X4 840 be overclocked?

A: Yes, its multiplier is unlocked. The Intel Core i3-6300 has a locked multiplier. However, no overclocked benchmark results are included in the data, so the performance impact cannot be quantified.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i3-6300 includes Intel HD 530 integrated graphics. The AMD Athlon X4 840 lists no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU for display output.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i3-6300 | AMD Athlon X4 840 |

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

| Cores | 2 | 4 |

| Threads | 4 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 3.80 GHz | 3.10 GHz |

| Boost Clock | None | 3.80 GHz |

| TDP | 51 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1151 | AMD Socket FM2+ |

| Architecture | Skylake | Steamroller |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | GlobalFoundries |

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

| Die Size | 150 mm² | 245 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 256 KB (total) |

| L2 Cache | 256 KB (per core) | 4 MB (total) |

| L3 Cache | 4 MB (shared) | None |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR3 |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 530 | None |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2015-08-31 | 2014-08-11 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part Number | SR2HA | AD840XYBJABOXAD840XYBI44JA |

The Verdict

The data points to an unambiguous conclusion: the Intel Core i3-6300 outperforms the AMD Athlon X4 840 in every benchmark category tested, with a consistent 19% to 19.3% margin across all five shared Cinebench tests. The Intel part achieves this despite having only 2 physical cores versus the AMD's 4, and despite the AMD's higher transistor count and larger die. This indicates that the Skylake architecture's per-thread efficiency, combined with its 14 nm process, delivers substantially more usable performance than the Steamroller architecture on 28 nm.

The AMD Athlon X4 840's only claims to consideration are its unlocked multiplier for overclocking and its status as a 4-core part at a lower base clock. However, since no overclocked results appear in the data, any potential gains remain unverified. The Intel part also includes integrated graphics, making it a more complete package for systems without discrete GPUs, and it carries a lower TDP (51 W vs 65 W).

For users building a system that requires maximum out-of-the-box performance in both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads, the Core i3-6300 is the clear choice from this data. Its consistent 19.3% lead across all tests leaves no ambiguity. The Athlon X4 840 might appeal to overclocking enthusiasts who are willing to invest time in tuning, but the benchmark evidence suggests they would be starting from a 19% deficit that may or may not be recoverable. Given that the Athlon X4 840 is also listed as end-of-life, while the Core i3-6300 remains active in production, the Intel part offers both superior performance and longer availability. The verdict is straightforward: the Intel Core i3-6300 wins decisively, and the data provides no scenario where the AMD Athlon X4 840 comes out ahead in tested workloads.