AMD Athlon X4 970 vs Intel Core i3-1115G4 Comparison

The Intel Core i3-1115G4 and AMD Athlon X4 970 are separated by a single point in average benchmark score (6851 vs 6850), yet their performance profiles could not be more different. The data reveals a classic clash between a modern, low-power mobile chip with high per-core efficiency and an older, higher-power desktop part with more physical cores. While their overall averages suggest near-identical performance, the head-to-head results show the Intel part dominating in 14 of 16 tests, with the AMD chip claiming only two narrow victories. This split is not a statistical tie but a fundamental difference in design philosophy and workload suitability.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i3-1115G4 is the clear winner for any task that relies on single-threaded performance, instruction-level parallelism, or modern encryption and media workloads. Its benchmark results indicate a commanding lead in Cinebench tests, where it outperforms the Athlon X4 970 by roughly 60% across both single-core and multi-core runs. The data shows the Intel part excels in floating-point math (10791 vs 6049), data encryption (3339 vs 1146), and extended instruction workloads (4588 vs 2156), with deltas ranging from 78.4% to 191.4%. This makes it the obvious choice for productivity applications, content creation, and any software that leverages AVX or similar modern instruction sets.

The AMD Athlon X4 970, conversely, wins in precisely two areas: data compression and integer math. Its data compression score of 62454 edges out the Intel's 62444 by a negligible margin, while its integer math score of 19174 beats the Intel's 17472 by 8.9%. These wins suggest the AMD chip retains an advantage in workloads that are heavily dependent on raw integer throughput and memory bandwidth, possibly due to its higher base clock of 3.80 GHz and four physical cores. However, these victories are narrow and isolated, indicating that the Athlon's strengths are limited to a very specific slice of computing tasks.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i3-1115G4 has an average benchmark score of 6851, while the AMD Athlon X4 970 scores 6850. The delta between them is 0%, making them statistically tied in overall average performance.

Q: How do the two compare in single-threaded performance?

A: The Intel Core i3-1115G4 is significantly faster in single-threaded tests. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 696 versus the Athlon's 435, a 60% advantage. In PassMark single-thread, the Intel part scores 2585 compared to the Athlon's 1658, a 55.9% lead.

Q: Does the AMD Athlon X4 970 win any benchmarks?

A: Yes, the AMD chip wins two head-to-head tests: PassMark data compression (62454 vs 62444, a 0% delta) and PassMark integer math (19174 vs 17472, an 8.9% lead). These are its only wins out of 16 comparisons.

Q: What is the difference in core counts?

A: The AMD Athlon X4 970 has 4 physical cores and 4 threads, while the Intel Core i3-1115G4 has 2 physical cores and 4 threads thanks to Hyper-Threading. Despite having half the physical cores, the Intel part wins all Cinebench multi-core tests.

Q: Are these CPUs in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both CPUs have a percentile ranking of 63 against all CPUs in the database, indicating they sit at the same overall performance tier despite their different strengths.

Q: Which CPU has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i3-1115G4 has a boost clock of 4.10 GHz, which is slightly higher than the AMD Athlon X4 970's boost clock of 4.00 GHz.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking pattern in the data is the Intel Core i3-1115G4's near-total dominance. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Intel part scores 497 versus the Athlon's 310, a 60.3% delta. This advantage persists across every Cinebench iteration: R20 multi-core (2071 vs 1294, 60% delta), R20 single-core (292 vs 182, 60.4% delta), R23 multi-core (4933 vs 3081, 60.1% delta), and R23 single-core (696 vs 435, 60% delta). The consistency of these results—all hovering near exactly 60%—suggests a fundamental architectural advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The PassMark suite tells a more nuanced story. The Intel chip's biggest win comes in data encryption, where its score of 3339 more than doubles the Athlon's 1146, a 191.4% delta. Extended instructions see a 112.8% delta (4588 vs 2156), and prime number finding shows a 127.3% delta (25 vs 11). These results indicate that the Intel part's newer Tiger Lake architecture with its 10 nm process node provides dramatic advantages in cryptography and SIMD-heavy workloads. The floating-point math test shows a 78.4% delta (10791 vs 6049), reinforcing the Intel chip's superior FPU performance.

The AMD Athlon X4 970's two wins are notable for their narrowness. In data compression, it scores 62454 against the Intel's 62444—a difference of just 10 points, effectively a tie. In integer math, it scores 19174 against 17472, a 8.9% lead. These wins are likely attributable to the Athlon's four physical cores and higher base clock of 3.80 GHz, which allow it to process certain integer-heavy algorithms more efficiently. However, the Intel chip still wins the PassMark multi-thread test by a 63.2% margin (5915 vs 3625) and the physics test by 68.7% (410 vs 243), showing that even with fewer physical cores, its architectural efficiency wins out in most multi-threaded scenarios.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ fundamentally across nearly every specification. The Intel Core i3-1115G4 is a mobile chip with a TDP of 15 watts, while the AMD Athlon X4 970 is a desktop part with a TDP of 65 watts. The Intel part uses the Intel BGA 1449 socket, whereas the AMD chip uses the AMD Socket AM4. The Intel chip has 2 cores and 4 threads with a base clock of 2.20 GHz and boost clock of 4.10 GHz; the AMD chip has 4 cores and 4 threads with a base clock of 3.80 GHz and boost clock of 4.00 GHz.

Memory support differs as well: the Intel part supports DDR4 and LPDDR4X, while the AMD chip supports only DDR4. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the AMD chip has a listed memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, while the Intel part does not have a listed bandwidth figure. PCIe support also differs, with the Intel chip offering Gen 4 with 4 CPU lanes and the AMD chip offering Gen 3 with 8 CPU lanes. The Intel chip includes integrated Iris Xe-LP Graphics G4, while the AMD chip has no integrated graphics. The Intel part was released in September 2020 with a launch MSRP of $281, while the AMD chip was released in July 2017 with no launch MSRP listed.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two chips is substantial. The Intel Core i3-1115G4 is built on Tiger Lake architecture using a 10 nm process node from Intel, with a die size of 144 mm². The AMD Athlon X4 970 uses the older Excavator architecture on a 28 nm process node from GlobalFoundries, with a die size of 250 mm² and 3,100 million transistors. This process advantage gives the Intel chip significantly better performance-per-watt, explaining how a 15 W part can outperform a 65 W part in most tests.

Cache configurations also differ markedly. The Intel chip features 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD chip has 320 KB of L1 cache total, 2 MB of L2 cache total, and no L3 cache at all. The absence of L3 cache on the AMD part is a significant handicap in modern workloads that rely on large cached data sets. The Intel chip's microarchitecture, codenamed Willow Cove-U, is generations ahead of the AMD's Bristol Ridge design, which explains the consistent 60% performance deltas across Cinebench tests despite the AMD chip having twice the physical cores.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i3-1115G4 is the superior processor for nearly all workloads. Its 14 wins out of 16 head-to-head benchmarks, including all Cinebench tests and the majority of PassMark tests, make it the clear choice for anyone prioritizing single-threaded performance, modern instruction sets, or energy efficiency. The 60% deltas across all Cinebench tests and the 191.4% lead in data encryption demonstrate that Tiger Lake's architectural advancements are not incremental but transformative. Users who run productivity suites, creative applications, or any software that benefits from AVX instructions will see substantial benefits from the Intel part.

The AMD Athlon X4 970, however, retains a narrow relevance for specific integer-heavy workloads. Its wins in integer math and data compression, while slim, indicate that its four physical cores and higher base clock still provide value in certain server-like or batch processing scenarios. The 8.9% lead in integer math and the near-tie in data compression suggest that legacy software optimized for many cores without modern instruction sets could still favor the AMD chip. However, given its 65 W TDP, lack of L3 cache, and 28 nm process node, the AMD part is difficult to recommend for any modern use case. The verdict from the data is clear: choose the Intel Core i3-1115G4 for general-purpose computing, and consider the AMD Athlon X4 970 only if your workload is exclusively focused on integer math and data compression.