AMD Athlon X4 950 vs Intel Core i3-4160T Comparison

# AMD Athlon X4 950 vs Intel Core i3-4160T

The AMD Athlon X4 950 and Intel Core i3-4160T sit at the same 29th percentile among all CPUs, with nearly identical average benchmark scores of 1047 and 1043 respectively. However, the head-to-head benchmark data tells a more decisive story: the Athlon X4 950 wins all five shared Cinebench tests, with margins consistently hovering around 15% across both single-core and multi-core workloads. The Intel part, despite its lower power envelope and integrated graphics, cannot match the AMD chip in any measured benchmark, though its closest rival comparison reveals a near-tie in overall average score.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The data is unambiguous. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Athlon X4 950 scores 306 against the i3-4160T's 265, a 15.5% advantage. That same 15.5% delta repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the AMD chip posts 1277 versus Intel's 1106. The pattern continues in Cinebench R23 multi-core: 3041 for the Athlon X4 950, 2635 for the i3-4160T, again a 15.4% gap.

Single-core performance mirrors the multi-core results. The Athlon X4 950 leads by 15.4% in Cinebench R20 single-core (180 vs 156) and by 15.3% in Cinebench R23 single-core (429 vs 372). This consistency across all five benchmarks is notable. The AMD chip does not merely win in one workload class; it wins everywhere, and by nearly identical margins. The narrowest delta is 15.3%, the widest is 15.5% — a remarkably tight band that suggests the performance difference is structural rather than workload-dependent.

The i3-4160T does have additional benchmark data not shared with the Athlon X4 950. In Geekbench, it scores 1840 multi-core and 926 single-core. These scores cannot be directly compared to the AMD part, but they place the Intel chip in a similar overall performance tier. Its average benchmark score of 1043 is just 0.4% below the Athlon's 1047, and both CPUs sit at the 29th percentile overall. The nearest rivals for both parts reinforce this parity: the Athlon X4 950's closest competitor, the AMD PRO A10-8770, scores 1046 (0.1% delta), while the i3-4160T's nearest rival, the Intel Pentium Gold G5620, scores 1045 (-0.2% delta). These are essentially identical performance neighborhoods.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The AMD Athlon X4 950 uses the Excavator architecture on the Bristol Ridge codename, built on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It packs 3,100 million transistors into a 250 mm² die. The Intel Core i3-4160T uses the Haswell architecture, built on a 22 nm process at Intel, with 1,400 million transistors on a 177 mm² die. The transistor and die-size differences reflect their respective process nodes and design approaches.

Core counts differ substantially. The Athlon X4 950 has 4 physical cores and 4 threads, while the i3-4160T has 2 physical cores and 4 threads via Hyper-Threading. The AMD chip's cache hierarchy consists of 320 KB L1 and 2 MB L2, with no L3 cache. The Intel chip has 64 KB L1 per core and 256 KB L2 per core, but adds a 3 MB shared L3 cache. Despite the Intel part's L3 advantage, the AMD chip wins all multi-core benchmarks, suggesting that its four physical cores outweigh the benefit of Intel's shared cache in these workloads.

Clock speeds and power draw reveal another contrast. The Athlon X4 950 runs at a 3.50 GHz base clock with a 3.80 GHz boost clock, drawing 65 W TDP. The i3-4160T runs at 3.10 GHz with no boost capability, drawing just 35 W TDP. The AMD chip uses nearly double the power budget, which explains its higher sustained clocks and performance advantage.

Platform support also diverges. The Athlon X4 950 uses AMD Socket AM4 with DDR4 memory in dual-channel configuration, delivering 38.4 GB/s memory bandwidth. The i3-4160T uses Intel Socket 1150 with DDR3 memory in dual-channel configuration; no memory bandwidth figure is provided. The AMD part supports PCIe Gen 3 with 8 CPU lanes, while the Intel part supports PCIe Gen 3 without a lane count specified. The i3-4160T includes integrated Intel HD 4400 graphics; the Athlon X4 950 has no integrated graphics listed.

The Verdict

Benchmark results indicate a clear performance hierarchy: the AMD Athlon X4 950 is the faster processor in every measured Cinebench workload. Its 15.3% to 15.5% margins across single-core and multi-core tests are consistent and substantial. The data shows no workload where the Intel Core i3-4160T takes the lead. The i3-4160T's only advantages are its 35 W TDP versus 65 W, its integrated graphics, and its L3 cache — none of which translate into benchmark wins.

However, the overall average benchmark scores tell a more nuanced story. The Athlon X4 950 averages 1047, the i3-4160T averages 1043, and both rank at the 29th percentile of all CPUs. The nearest rivals for each part include the same chips — the AMD PRO A10-9700 and Intel Pentium Gold G5620 both appear in the nearest-rival lists for both processors with near-identical scores. This suggests that while the Athlon X4 950 wins the head-to-head benchmarks, the two parts occupy the same performance tier in the broader CPU landscape.

For users prioritizing raw compute performance in Cinebench-style workloads, the Athlon X4 950 is the data-backed choice. For users who need integrated graphics or minimal power draw, the i3-4160T offers those features, but at a measurable performance cost in every benchmark where both parts were tested.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-core Cinebench tests?

A: The AMD Athlon X4 950 wins all multi-core Cinebench tests. It scores 306 vs 265 in R15, 1277 vs 1106 in R20, and 3041 vs 2635 in R23, each a 15.4% to 15.5% advantage over the Intel Core i3-4160T.

Q: Does the Intel Core i3-4160T win any benchmark against the Athlon X4 950?

A: No. The head-to-head data shows the AMD Athlon X4 950 wins all 5 shared benchmarks, with the Intel part winning 0. The i3-4160T has additional Geekbench scores (1840 multi-core, 926 single-core), but these are not compared directly to the AMD part.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The AMD Athlon X4 950 has 4 cores and 4 threads. The Intel Core i3-4160T has 2 cores and 4 threads. The AMD chip's four physical cores likely contribute to its multi-core advantage despite the Intel part's Hyper-Threading.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The AMD Athlon X4 950 has a 65 W TDP, while the Intel Core i3-4160T has a 35 W TDP. The Intel chip uses less than half the power budget, which may be relevant for compact or low-power systems, though the AMD chip delivers higher benchmark scores.

Q: Do these CPUs support the same memory type?

A: No. The AMD Athlon X4 950 supports DDR4 memory in dual-channel configuration with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core i3-4160T supports DDR3 memory in dual-channel configuration, with no bandwidth figure listed.

Q: Which CPU has integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core i3-4160T includes Intel HD 4400 integrated graphics. The AMD Athlon X4 950 has no integrated graphics listed. This makes the Intel part suitable for systems without a discrete GPU.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Athlon X4 950 wins every measured benchmark category. Its 15.4% lead in Cinebench R20 single-core (180 vs 156) and 15.3% lead in R23 single-core (429 vs 372) show that even in lightly threaded workloads, the AMD chip's higher clock speeds and four physical cores prevail. In multi-core workloads, the advantage persists: 15.5% in Cinebench R15 and R20, and 15.4% in R23. The Athlon X4 950 is the clear choice for users running rendering workloads, CPU-intensive applications, or any scenario where Cinebench-style performance matters. Its Socket AM4 platform with DDR4 support also positions it on a more modern upgrade path.

The Intel Core i3-4160T's wins are not in benchmark scores but in platform characteristics. Its 35 W TDP makes it suitable for low-power builds where thermal output and electricity draw are primary concerns. The integrated Intel HD 4400 graphics eliminate the need for a discrete GPU in basic systems. Its 3 MB shared L3 cache and Haswell architecture provide a different cache hierarchy, though this does not translate into benchmark wins. The i3-4160T's Geekbench scores of 1840 multi-core and 926 single-core offer additional reference points for users comparing across that benchmark suite.

For users who must choose based purely on the benchmark data provided, the Athlon X4 950 is the faster processor in all 5 head-to-head tests. The i3-4160T is the appropriate selection only when its specific advantages — power efficiency, integrated graphics, or platform requirements — outweigh the 15%+ performance deficit. Both CPUs sit at the 29th percentile overall, and their average scores are within 0.4% of each other, so the choice ultimately depends on whether benchmark performance or platform features take priority.