AMD FX-9800P vs Intel Core i5-3230M Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded benchmark data presents a clear split between these two mobile processors. The Intel Core i5-3230M wins six of the seven head-to-head comparisons, with the AMD FX-9800P taking only a single victory. For users prioritizing sustained multi-threaded rendering workloads, the Intel part consistently leads by margins between 4.6% and 4.9% across the Cinebench suite. However, the AMD FX-9800P demonstrates a notable advantage in Geekbench multicore testing, where it scores 1127 against the Intel's 1018, a 9.7% difference in AMD's favor.

The average benchmark scores place the Intel at 754 versus 745 for the AMD, a gap of roughly 1.2%. Both processors sit at the 20th percentile among all CPUs in the database, indicating they occupy similar overall performance tiers despite their architectural differences. The Intel's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon X5460 at an identical 754 average score and the Intel Core i5-4250U at 756, showing the i5-3230M performs in line with older desktop Xeon parts. The AMD's closest competitor is the AMD A10 PRO-7800B at 746, with the Intel Core i5-4200U also at 746, placing the FX-9800P just below those references.

The verdict depends on workload. The Intel Core i5-3230M is the safer choice for Cinebench-based rendering tasks and single-threaded responsiveness. The AMD FX-9800P is preferable when Geekbench multicore performance matters more than any other metric. Given that the Intel wins the majority of tests and posts a higher average score, the database leans toward the Intel part for general-purpose mobile computing, though the margin is modest in absolute terms.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. The Intel Core i5-3230M uses Ivy Bridge architecture on a 22 nm process fabricated by Intel, featuring 2 cores and 4 threads through Hyper-Threading. Its die size measures 118 mm². The AMD FX-9800P employs Excavator architecture on a 28 nm process from GlobalFoundries, with 4 physical cores and 4 threads, no simultaneous multithreading. The AMD die is substantially larger at 250 mm² and contains 3,100 million transistors, while the Intel part does not have a recorded transistor count in the database.

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. The Intel i5-3230M has 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core, plus a shared 3 MB L3 cache. The AMD FX-9800P offers 320 KB of total L1 cache and 1 MB of L2 cache per module, with no L3 cache at all. This means the Intel part relies on a larger shared cache pool, while the AMD part depends entirely on its L1 and L2 levels.

Memory support also diverges. The Intel chip supports DDR3 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The AMD chip supports DDR4 memory, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s. The AMD includes PCIe Gen 3 with 8 lanes for the CPU, while the Intel part has no PCIe information recorded. Integrated graphics differ as well: the Intel uses HD 4000 graphics, while the AMD pairs with a Radeon R7 8CU solution.

Power characteristics show a notable split. The Intel i5-3230M has a TDP of 35 watts, while the AMD FX-9800P draws only 15 watts. This makes the AMD part substantially more power-efficient on paper, a fact that may interest users in thin-and-light laptops despite its lower benchmark scores. The Intel's base clock is 2.60 GHz with a 3.20 GHz boost, while the AMD runs at 2.70 GHz base and 3.60 GHz boost, giving the AMD higher clock speeds in both states.

Release timing also differs. The Intel processor was released on 2012-12-31, while the AMD arrived on 2016-05-30. The AMD is marked as end-of-life production status, while the Intel has no such status recorded. The Intel uses Socket G2 (988B), the AMD uses Socket FP4.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-3230M averages 754 points across all recorded benchmarks, while the AMD FX-9800P averages 745 points, a difference of approximately 1.2%.

Q: Does the AMD FX-9800P win any benchmark against the Intel Core i5-3230M?

A: Yes, the AMD wins the Geekbench multicore test with a score of 1127 versus the Intel's 1018, representing a 9.7% advantage for the AMD.

Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench R23 multicore performance?

A: The Intel scores 2184 points, while the AMD scores 2088 points, giving the Intel a 4.6% lead in that specific test.

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

A: The Intel has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the AMD has 4 cores and 4 threads. Despite having fewer physical cores, the Intel wins most multi-threaded tests.

Q: Which processor has a lower power draw?

A: The AMD FX-9800P has a TDP of 15 watts, compared to the Intel's 35 watts, making the AMD more power-efficient by the recorded specifications.

Q: What memory types do these processors support?

A: The Intel supports DDR3 memory, while the AMD supports DDR4 memory. Both use dual-channel configurations.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-3230M | AMD FX-9800P |

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

| Cores | 2 | 4 |

| Threads | 4 | 4 |

| Base clock | 2.60 GHz | 2.70 GHz |

| Boost clock | 3.20 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| TDP | 35 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket G2 (988B) | AMD Socket FP4 |

| Architecture | Ivy Bridge | Excavator |

| Process node | 22 nm | 28 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | GlobalFoundries |

| Die size | 118 mm² | 250 mm² |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 3,100 million |

| L1 cache | 64 KB per core | 320 KB total |

| L2 cache | 256 KB per core | 1 MB per module |

| L3 cache | 3 MB shared | None |

| Memory support | DDR3 | DDR4 |

| Memory bandwidth | Not recorded | 29.9 GB/s |

| PCIe | Not recorded | Gen 3, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Intel HD 4000 | Radeon R7 8CU |

| Release date | 2012-12-31 | 2016-05-30 |

| Production status | Not recorded | End-of-life |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite shows a consistent pattern of Intel superiority. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Intel scores 220 against the AMD's 210, a 4.8% margin. Cinebench R20 multicore repeats this trend with 917 versus 876, a 4.7% difference. The single-core results follow suit: Cinebench R20 single-core gives 129 for Intel and 123 for AMD, a 4.9% lead, while Cinebench R23 single-core shows 308 versus 294, a 4.8% margin. The largest Cinebench gap appears in R23 multicore, where the Intel's 2184 beats the AMD's 2088 by 4.6%.

Geekbench tells a different story. The AMD FX-9800P wins the multicore test decisively, posting 1127 points against the Intel's 1018, a 9.7% swing in AMD's favor. This is the single largest performance difference in either direction across all recorded tests. The Geekbench single-core test, however, returns to the Intel side: 505 versus 498, a narrower 1.4% advantage.

The benchmark totals show Intel winning 6 tests and AMD winning 1. The Intel's wins cluster in the Cinebench family, where its margins stay tightly grouped between 4.6% and 4.9%. The AMD's win comes in a test where it leads by nearly double the Intel's typical margin, suggesting the FX-9800P has a specific strength in the Geekbench multicore workload that does not translate to rendering tasks.

Average scores reflect this split: the Intel's 754 average versus the AMD's 745 places the Intel about 1.2% ahead overall. Both processors sit at the 20th percentile of all CPUs, meaning their overall standing in the database is essentially identical despite the test-by-test differences.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-3230M dominates rendering and single-threaded workloads. Every Cinebench test, whether multicore or single-core, favors the Intel by margins between 4.6% and 4.9%. This includes the most demanding Cinebench R23 multicore test, where the Intel posts 2184 points. Users running video encoding, 3D rendering, or other Cinebench-style workloads should expect the Intel to deliver consistently faster results. The Intel also wins the Geekbench single-core test, though by a smaller 1.4% margin, indicating a slight edge in lightly threaded applications.

The AMD FX-9800P wins exactly one benchmark: Geekbench multicore. Its 1127-point score represents a 9.7% advantage over the Intel, the largest margin in any test. This suggests the AMD's four physical cores provide a real benefit in certain multi-threaded workloads that favor its architecture, even without a shared L3 cache. The AMD also offers a significantly lower TDP of 15 watts versus the Intel's 35 watts, which may make it attractive for systems prioritizing battery life or thermal management. Its support for DDR4 memory and PCIe Gen 3 with 8 lanes gives it a more modern platform foundation, even if its benchmark results do not consistently translate that into performance wins.

For most users, the Intel part is the better choice based on the recorded data. It wins the majority of tests, holds a higher average score, and performs strongly in both single-core and multi-core Cinebench scenarios. The AMD is the pick only when Geekbench multicore performance is the primary requirement, or when the lower power draw is a decisive factor. The database shows a narrow overall gap, but the Intel's consistency across the benchmark suite makes it the safer recommendation.