AMD FX-8800P vs Intel Core i5-L16G7 Comparison

AMD FX-8800P and Intel Core i5-L16G7 are two mobile processors from different design philosophies and eras. The AMD FX-8800P is a 28 nm Excavator part built for the Carrizo generation, while the Intel Core i5-L16G7 is a 10 nm Lakefield hybrid design. Benchmark results from the database show a consistent edge for the Intel chip across all recorded multi-core and single-core tests, but the AMD part has its own strengths in platform characteristics and memory bandwidth. This analysis breaks down where each processor wins, what differs under the hood, and which user should choose which, based strictly on the recorded data.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-L16G7 wins every head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database. That includes all five comparisons: Cinebench R15 multi-core, Cinebench R20 multi-core, Cinebench R20 single-core, Cinebench R23 multi-core, and Cinebench R23 single-core. The Intel chip takes the multi-core tests with scores of 281 in Cinebench R15, 1173 in Cinebench R20, and 2793 in Cinebench R23. On the single-core side, it scores 165 in Cinebench R20 and 394 in Cinebench R23. The AMD FX-8800P, by contrast, records 242 in Cinebench R15 multi-core, 1010 in Cinebench R20 multi-core, 142 in Cinebench R20 single-core, 2407 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, and 339 in Cinebench R23 single-core. The Intel part is ahead by roughly 14% in each of these tests, with the delta ranging from 13.8% to 14%. That is a consistent margin across both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads.

However, the AMD FX-8800P is not without its own advantages. The database shows that the AMD part has a dual-channel memory bus with a recorded memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s, which is double the 17.1 GB/s of the Intel chip, which uses a single-channel LPDDR4X interface. In memory-sensitive workloads, that bandwidth advantage could matter, though the benchmark data available here does not include memory-specific tests. The AMD part also supports DDR3 memory, while the Intel chip uses LPDDR4X. The AMD FX-8800P has a larger L1 cache at 320 KB compared to the Intel's 80 KB, and its L2 cache is listed as 1 MB per module, whereas the Intel part has 512 KB of L2. The AMD chip also has more PCIe lanes available from the CPU: 8 lanes versus 6 lanes on the Intel part, both at Gen 3. For users who need more direct CPU-attached PCIe connectivity, the AMD FX-8800P offers a wider path.

The Intel Core i5-L16G7 counters with a shared 4 MB L3 cache, which the AMD FX-8800P does not have at all; the database lists the AMD part's L3 as null. That L3 cache can help with frequently accessed data across cores. The Intel chip also has a much lower TDP of 7 watts versus 15 watts for the AMD part, which suggests significantly lower power draw in sustained workloads, though the database does not include measured power figures. The Intel part also has a smaller die at 82 mm² compared to the AMD's 250 mm², and it packs more transistors: 4,050 million versus 3,100 million. Those numbers reflect the process advantage of 10 nm versus 28 nm.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different architecture families. The AMD FX-8800P uses the Excavator architecture, which is part of the Carrizo generation, built on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It has 4 cores and 4 threads, so no simultaneous multithreading. The base clock is 2.10 GHz with a boost clock of 3.40 GHz. The Intel Core i5-L16G7 uses the Lakefield architecture, also named Lakefield, built on a 10 nm process at Intel. It has 5 cores and 5 threads, so again no hyper-threading, but one more core than the AMD part. The base clock is listed as 1400.00 MHz, which is 1.40 GHz, with a boost clock of 3.00 GHz. Despite the lower boost clock on the Intel part, it still wins all benchmark tests, which points to the IPC advantage of the newer Lakefield architecture.

The transistor counts tell a similar story. The AMD FX-8800P has 3,100 million transistors on a 250 mm² die. The Intel Core i5-L16G7 has 4,050 million transistors on an 82 mm² die. That is a much higher transistor density for the Intel chip, enabled by the 10 nm process. The cache hierarchy differs significantly. The AMD part has 320 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per module, with no L3 cache. The Intel part has 80 KB of L1, 512 KB of L2, and 4 MB of shared L3. The smaller L1 and L2 on the Intel chip are compensated by the presence of the shared L3, which the AMD part lacks entirely.

Memory support is another major divergence. The AMD FX-8800P supports DDR3 memory over a dual-channel bus, yielding a memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. The Intel Core i5-L16G7 supports LPDDR4X over a single-channel bus, yielding 17.1 GB/s. The AMD part has double the memory bandwidth on paper, but the Intel chip uses a more modern memory type. Neither processor supports ECC memory, according to the database. PCIe connectivity also differs: the AMD part provides Gen 3 with 8 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel part provides Gen 3 with 6 lanes from the CPU.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The AMD FX-8800P includes a Radeon R7 8CU iGPU, while the Intel Core i5-L16G7 includes UHD Graphics 64EU. The database does not include graphics benchmarks, so no performance conclusion can be drawn from these specifications alone. The socket situation also separates the two. The AMD FX-8800P uses AMD Socket FP4, while the Intel Core i5-L16G7 has no socket listed, which is typical for a soldered or integrated mobile part. The AMD part has a part number of FM880PAAY43KAFM880PAAY43KAD, while the Intel part has SRH4U and SRJGA. Both processors are marked as end-of-life in the database and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark data is unambiguous. The Intel Core i5-L16G7 wins all five recorded tests, and the margins are consistent. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Intel part scores 281 against the AMD FX-8800P's 242, a delta of 13.9% in favor of Intel. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, Intel scores 1173 against 1010, again a 13.9% delta. In Cinebench R20 single-core, Intel scores 165 against 142, also 13.9%. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, Intel scores 2793 against 2407, a 13.8% delta. In Cinebench R23 single-core, Intel scores 394 against 339, a 14% delta. These are not isolated wins; the Intel part is consistently about 14% faster across both single-core and multi-core Cinebench tests.

The average benchmark score in the database places the AMD FX-8800P at 843, with a percentile of 22 among all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-3520M at 843 with a 0% delta, the Intel Core i7-920 at 840 with a 0.3% delta, the Intel Xeon X5470 at 839 with a 0.4% delta, and the Intel Core i5-3380M at 838 with a 0.6% delta. The Intel Core i5-L16G7 has an average benchmark score of 816, with a percentile of 22 as well. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon E5540 at 820 with a 0.5% delta in the rival's favor, the Intel Xeon X3440 at 815 with a 0.1% delta, the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 at 813 with a 0.4% delta, and the Intel Core i7-5550U at 813 with a 0.4% delta. So the AMD part sits slightly higher in average score, but the Intel part wins every direct head-to-head test. That apparent contradiction is explained by the fact that the average score includes different benchmark sets; the AMD FX-8800P has Geekbench multi-core and single-core scores recorded (1234 and 524), while the Intel Core i5-L16G7 has no Geekbench scores in the database.

The Cinebench results are the most telling. The Intel part wins multi-core Cinebench R23 by 386 points, which is a 13.8% margin. It wins single-core Cinebench R23 by 55 points, a 14% margin. The consistency of the delta across all tests suggests that the Intel architecture has a uniform performance advantage, likely from better IPC and the additional core. The AMD FX-8800P does have a higher boost clock at 3.40 GHz versus 3.00 GHz, but that does not translate into a win in any recorded benchmark. The Intel part's 5 cores versus 4 cores also helps in multi-threaded tests, though the single-core wins show that core count is not the only factor.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core i5-L16G7 is faster, scoring 2793 compared to the AMD FX-8800P's 2407, a delta of 13.8% in favor of Intel.

Q: Does the AMD FX-8800P have any memory bandwidth advantage?

A: Yes. The AMD FX-8800P supports dual-channel DDR3 with a memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s, while the Intel Core i5-L16G7 uses single-channel LPDDR4X with a bandwidth of 17.1 GB/s.

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The AMD FX-8800P has 4 cores and 4 threads. The Intel Core i5-L16G7 has 5 cores and 5 threads.

Q: Which processor has a lower TDP?

A: The Intel Core i5-L16G7 has a TDP of 7 watts, while the AMD FX-8800P has a TDP of 15 watts.

Q: Does the AMD FX-8800P have an L3 cache?

A: No. The database lists the AMD FX-8800P's L3 cache as null. The Intel Core i5-L16G7 has 4 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the Intel Core i5-L16G7?

A: The launch MSRP is $281.

Q: Which processor has a better percentile ranking among all CPUs?

A: Both processors have the same percentile, 22.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification category. The AMD FX-8800P has 4 cores and 4 threads, while the Intel Core i5-L16G7 has 5 cores and 5 threads. The AMD base clock is 2.10 GHz with a boost of 3.40 GHz. The Intel base clock is 1400.00 MHz (1.40 GHz) with a boost of 3.00 GHz. The AMD part has a TDP of 15 watts, the Intel part 7 watts. The AMD part uses AMD Socket FP4, while the Intel part has no socket listed. The architecture differs: Excavator (Carrizo) for AMD versus Lakefield for Intel. The process node is 28 nm for AMD and 10 nm for Intel. The foundry is GlobalFoundries for AMD and Intel for Intel. Transistors are 3,100 million on a 250 mm² die for AMD, versus 4,050 million on an 82 mm² die for Intel.

Cache configurations are different as well. The AMD FX-8800P has 320 KB of L1 and 1 MB of L2 per module, with no L3. The Intel Core i5-L16G7 has 80 KB of L1, 512 KB of L2, and 4 MB of shared L3. Memory support is DDR3 for AMD and LPDDR4X for Intel. The memory bus is dual-channel for AMD and single-channel for Intel. Memory bandwidth is 34.1 GB/s for AMD and 17.1 GB/s for Intel. PCIe is Gen 3 with 8 lanes for AMD and Gen 3 with 6 lanes for Intel. Integrated graphics are Radeon R7 8CU for AMD and UHD Graphics 64EU for Intel. The release date for the AMD part is June 1, 2015, while the Intel part has no release date listed. The launch MSRP is null for AMD and $281 for Intel. The AMD part number is FM880PAAY43KAFM880PAAY43KAD, while the Intel part has two part numbers: SRH4U and SRJGA. Both are end-of-life and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear winner for raw CPU performance. The Intel Core i5-L16G7 wins every recorded benchmark, with a consistent margin of about 14% across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, in both single-core and multi-core tests. It also has a lower TDP at 7 watts versus 15 watts, a smaller die at 82 mm² versus 250 mm², and a more modern 10 nm process versus 28 nm. It includes a shared 4 MB L3 cache that the AMD part lacks entirely. For users who want the fastest recorded Cinebench scores in a low-power mobile package, the Intel Core i5-L16G7 is the better choice.

The AMD FX-8800P still has a role. It offers double the memory bandwidth at 34.1 GB/s versus 17.1 GB/s, which could benefit memory-heavy tasks, though the database does not include memory benchmarks to confirm this. It also has more CPU-attached PCIe lanes at 8 versus 6, and it supports DDR3, which may be relevant for platforms that use that memory type. Its average benchmark score is slightly higher at 843 versus 816, and its nearest rival comparison shows parity with Intel Core i7-3520M and a 0.3% lead over Intel Core i7-920. That average score advantage comes from Geekbench results that are not recorded for the Intel part, so it should not be over-interpreted.

For a builder choosing between these two, the decision hinges on workload. For general CPU performance in Cinebench-style tasks, the Intel Core i5-L16G7 wins every measurable test. For memory bandwidth and PCIe lane count, the AMD FX-8800P has the advantage on paper. The Intel part is also far more power-efficient per the TDP rating, and it has the only L3 cache in this comparison. The AMD part is the choice only if the platform requires DDR3, dual-channel memory, or more PCIe lanes. Given the benchmark results, the Intel Core i5-L16G7 is the stronger processor for compute workloads, while the AMD FX-8800P remains relevant in specific platform and memory scenarios. Both are end-of-life products, so availability will depend on existing systems or the used market. The recorded data does not support a different conclusion.