AMD Athlon X4 845 vs Intel Core i3-4150 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data presents an unusually one-sided picture. Across every recorded head-to-head test, the AMD Athlon X4 845 takes the win, and it does so by a remarkably consistent margin. The Intel Core i3-4150 does not secure a single victory in any of the five comparisons available in the database. That said, the story is not simply about raw performance; it is about the shape of that performance and where each processor fits in a system.

The AMD Athlon X4 845 wins every multi-threaded workload, which makes sense given its four physical cores against the Intel's two cores and four threads. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD scores 324 versus 290, a 10.5% advantage. That pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core (1350 vs 1212, a 10.2% gap) and Cinebench R23 multi-core (3215 vs 2888, again 10.2%). The Athlon's edge holds in single-threaded tests too, which is more surprising. In Cinebench R20 single-core, it leads 190 to 170 (10.5%), and in R23 single-core, 453 to 407 (10.2%). So the AMD processor does not merely win where core count helps; it wins where per-thread speed matters as well.

For the Intel Core i3-4150, the wins are not in performance but in platform attributes. It includes integrated graphics (Intel HD 4400), while the Athlon X4 845 has none. It also draws less power: 54 watts TDP versus 65 watts. The Intel part supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, whereas the AMD part offers PCIe Gen 3 with only 8 lanes. If the database's measurements are the only lens, the AMD is the faster processor in every recorded benchmark, but the Intel offers a more complete package for a system without a discrete GPU.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core i3-4150 is built on the Haswell architecture, using a 22 nm process from Intel's own foundry. It packs 1,400 million transistors into a 177 mm² die. The AMD Athlon X4 845 uses the Excavator architecture, specifically the Carrizo generation, on a 28 nm process from GlobalFoundries. That chip holds 3,100 million transistors on a 250 mm² die, roughly double the transistor count and significantly larger silicon.

Core topology differs sharply. The Intel part has 2 cores and 4 threads, relying on Hyper-Threading to fill execution slots. The AMD part has 4 physical cores and 4 threads, no SMT. Cache layouts reflect that difference. Intel provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 3 MB of shared L3. AMD provides 320 KB of L1 total, 2 MB of L2 total, and no L3 at all. The absence of L3 on the AMD chip is notable; the larger L2 (2 MB versus 512 KB combined on Intel) partially compensates, but the architectural approach is entirely different.

Memory support is DDR3 for both, dual-channel for both, but bandwidth favors AMD: 34.1 GB/s versus 25.6 GB/s. The Intel processor has a base clock of 3.50 GHz with no boost capability, while the AMD runs at 3.50 GHz base and can boost to 3.80 GHz. The AMD multiplier is unlocked, meaning overclocking is possible, whereas the Intel multiplier is locked. Neither supports ECC memory. The Intel part uses Socket 1150, the AMD uses Socket FM2+. The Intel chip includes integrated graphics; the AMD does not. Both are end-of-life products, but the Intel launched in April 2014 with a launch MSRP of $117, while the AMD launched in February 2016 with no recorded MSRP in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are striking for their consistency. Every single test shows the AMD Athlon X4 845 ahead by roughly 10%, with no overlap in scores.

Starting with Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD scores 324 against Intel's 290. That is a 10.5% deficit for the Intel part, and it establishes the pattern. Moving to Cinebench R20 multi-core, the AMD scores 1350, Intel scores 1212, a 10.2% gap. The same margin appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core: 3215 for AMD, 2888 for Intel, again 10.2%. The consistency across three generations of the Cinebench renderer suggests the performance difference is structural, not workload-specific.

Single-threaded results tell the same story. In Cinebench R20 single-core, AMD leads 190 to 170, a 10.5% advantage. In Cinebench R23 single-core, AMD leads 453 to 407, a 10.2% advantage. This is notable because single-thread performance is often where Intel parts of this era held an edge. Here, the Excavator core at 3.80 GHz boost clearly outpaces the Haswell core locked at 3.50 GHz. The boost clock likely explains part of the gap, but the architecture itself appears competitive in this specific matchup.

The database also records Geekbench scores for the Intel part (multicore 1896, singlecore 968), but no corresponding Geekbench results appear for the AMD in the head-to-head set. That omission limits direct comparison in that test, but the available Cinebench data is comprehensive and unidirectional. The wins column is 0 for Intel, 5 for AMD.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The AMD Athlon X4 845 wins every multi-threaded benchmark in the database. It scores 324 vs 290 in Cinebench R15, 1350 vs 1212 in R20, and 3215 vs 2888 in R23, a consistent 10.2% to 10.5% lead over the Intel Core i3-4150.

Q: Does the Intel part win any single-threaded test?

A: No. The AMD Athlon X4 845 leads in both recorded single-threaded tests. In Cinebench R20 single-core, it scores 190 vs 170 (10.5% ahead), and in R23 single-core, 453 vs 407 (10.2% ahead).

Q: What is the core and thread configuration for each?

A: The Intel Core i3-4150 has 2 cores and 4 threads. The AMD Athlon X4 845 has 4 cores and 4 threads. Both have a 3.50 GHz base clock, but the AMD can boost to 3.80 GHz while the Intel has no boost capability.

Q: Which processor includes integrated graphics?

A: Only the Intel Core i3-4150 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD 4400). The AMD Athlon X4 845 has no integrated graphics, so it requires a discrete GPU for display output.

Q: How do the cache hierarchies compare?

A: The Intel part has 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 3 MB shared L3. The AMD part has 320 KB total L1, 2 MB total L2, and no L3 cache. The AMD compensates with a larger L2 and higher memory bandwidth (34.1 GB/s vs 25.6 GB/s).

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The Intel Core i3-4150 has a 54 watt TDP. The AMD Athlon X4 845 has a 65 watt TDP. The Intel part draws less power despite being slower in the benchmark suite.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear performance hierarchy: the AMD Athlon X4 845 is the faster processor in every recorded benchmark. If raw compute throughput is the only criterion, the AMD wins without qualification. Its 10% advantage in both single and multi-threaded Cinebench tests is decisive and consistent. The four physical cores and higher boost clock give it a structural edge that the Intel's Hyper-Threading cannot overcome in this matchup.

However, the Intel Core i3-4150 offers advantages that do not appear in benchmark scores. It includes integrated graphics, which the AMD lacks entirely. That makes the Intel part a more versatile choice for a basic desktop where a discrete GPU is not planned. The Intel also runs cooler, with a 54 watt TDP versus 65 watts, and its PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes doubles the AMD's 8 lanes for CPU-attached expansion. For a system with a single GPU and no need for extra PCIe bandwidth, the AMD's 8 lanes are sufficient, but the Intel provides more headroom.

The average benchmark scores in the database place these two very close overall: Intel at 1119, AMD at 1106. The Intel sits at the 32nd percentile of all CPUs, the AMD at the 31st. Their nearest rivals reflect that proximity. The Intel's closest comparables include the Intel Core i7-2860QM (1120, delta -0.1%) and the Intel Core i5-3550S (1118, delta 0.1%). The AMD's closest rivals are the AMD Opteron 3280 (1106, delta 0%) and the AMD PRO A12-8870 (1107, delta -0.1%). So in the broader database context, these two are nearly equivalent in average performance, even though the head-to-head Cinebench results favor the AMD consistently.

Who should pick which? A user building a system without a discrete GPU should choose the Intel Core i3-4150, because the integrated HD 4400 graphics provide display output that the AMD cannot match. A user with a dedicated graphics card who prioritizes compute performance in rendering workloads should choose the AMD Athlon X4 845, as it wins every Cinebench test. The AMD also offers an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, which the Intel does not. But the Intel's lower TDP and full 16-lane PCIe Gen 3 support may appeal to those building a compact, power-conscious system. The verdict is not a blanket recommendation; it depends on whether the system includes a GPU and whether the 10% performance gap matters more than the Intel's platform features.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i3-4150 | AMD Athlon X4 845 |

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

| Cores | 2 | 4 |

| Threads | 4 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 3.50 GHz | 3.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | None | 3.80 GHz |

| TDP | 54 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1150 | AMD Socket FM2+ |

| Architecture | Haswell | Excavator |

| Codename | Haswell | Carrizo |

| Process Node | 22 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | 1,400 million | 3,100 million |

| Die Size | 177 mm² | 250 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 320 KB |

| L2 Cache | 256 KB (per core) | 2 MB |

| L3 Cache | 3 MB (shared) | None |

| Memory Bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 34.1 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 3, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 4400 | None |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | Yes |

| Part Number | SR1PJ | AD845XACI43KA |

| Release Date | 2014-04-30 | 2016-02-01 |

| Launch MSRP | $117 | Not recorded |