CPU Comparison

The Intel Core i5-2300 and AMD FX-9830P are two end-of-life processors from different eras and market segments, yet they land in nearly the same performance tier. The data shows the Intel part, a 2011 desktop chip built on Sandy Bridge, edges out the 2016 mobile-focused AMD part across every single benchmark recorded. Both CPUs sit within a single percentile point of each other in the global ranking, with the i5-2300 at the 28th percentile and the FX-9830P at the 27th, but the Intel chip holds a consistent, if narrow, lead in all five head-to-head tests.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-2300 wins outright in every benchmark category where both processors were tested. Its most significant advantage appears in the multi-core Cinebench tests, where it consistently beats the AMD FX-9830P by a 5% margin. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the i5-2300 scores 2947 against the FX-9830P's 2806; in Cinebench R20 multicore, the margin is 1237 versus 1178; and in Cinebench R15 multicore, it is 296 versus 282. These results indicate that for sustained multi-threaded workloads like video rendering or 3D scene compilation, the older Intel architecture still delivers roughly 5% more throughput than AMD's Excavator part.

Single-core performance tells a similar story, though the gap is slightly tighter. The i5-2300 scores 416 in Cinebench R23 single-core versus 396 for the FX-9830P, a 5.1% lead. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Intel chip posts 174 against AMD's 166, a 4.8% advantage. For lightly threaded applications such as older games or everyday productivity tasks, the Intel processor holds a modest but repeatable edge. The FX-9830P's only recorded win outside the head-to-head set is in Geekbench, where it posts 1606 multi-core and 605 single-core, but no comparable Geekbench numbers exist for the i5-2300, so this cannot be used as a direct comparison.

The AMD part does have one clear advantage that is not reflected in CPU benchmarks: power consumption. The FX-9830P carries a 35W TDP, while the i5-2300 is rated at 95W. For a mobile platform, the AMD chip's thermal envelope is far more manageable, which could make it the better choice in a thin-and-light chassis where sustained CPU performance is limited by cooling. However, in a pure compute contest on identical cooling, the i5-2300 wins every recorded test.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies and manufacturing generations. The i5-2300 is built on Intel's 32nm Sandy Bridge architecture, packed into a 216 mm² die with 1,160 million transistors. It uses a traditional four-core, four-thread layout with a shared 6MB L3 cache, and each core gets 64KB of L1 and 256KB of L2 cache. The FX-9830P, by contrast, uses AMD's Excavator architecture on a 28nm process from GlobalFoundries, with a larger 250 mm² die and 3,100 million transistors. Its cache structure is different: 320KB of L1 total, and 1MB of L2 per module, with no L3 cache at all.

Memory support is another significant split. The i5-2300 pairs with DDR3 memory over a dual-channel bus, while the FX-9830P supports DDR4 and offers a rated memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. That said, the Intel chip's older memory controller does not appear to hurt it in the recorded benchmarks, as it still outpaces the AMD part in every Cinebench test. The FX-9830P also has a higher base clock (3.00 GHz versus 2.80 GHz) and a higher boost clock (3.70 GHz versus 3.10 GHz), yet it still loses in single-threaded tests, suggesting that IPC (instructions per clock) differences favor Intel's design.

Platform features also diverge. The i5-2300 uses Intel Socket 1155 with PCIe Gen 3 and 16 CPU lanes, while the FX-9830P uses AMD Socket FP4 with only 8 PCIe Gen 3 lanes. Both integrate graphics: Intel HD 2000 on the i5-2300 and a Radeon R7 8CU on the FX-9830P. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier, and both are officially end-of-life. The i5-2300 was released on January 8, 2011, while the FX-9830P arrived over five years later on May 30, 2016, yet the older Intel part remains the faster CPU in this matchup.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are uniformly in favor of the Intel Core i5-2300, with margins ranging from 4.8% to 5.1%. The largest percentage win for the Intel chip is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 416 against the FX-9830P's 396, a 5.1% delta. The smallest margin is in Cinebench R20 single-core, at 4.8%, with scores of 174 and 166 respectively. Across all three multi-core tests, the delta is a consistent 5%: 296 versus 282 in R15, 1237 versus 1178 in R20, and 2947 versus 2806 in R23.

These numbers paint a clear picture of a narrow but reliable performance gap. The i5-2300's average benchmark score is 1014, which places it between the Intel Xeon W5580 (1012, +0.2%) and the Intel Core i3-4160 (1017, -0.3%) in its nearest rival list. The FX-9830P's average score of 1006 puts it level with the Intel Core i7-880 and Intel Core i5-10210Y (both 1006, 0% delta), and just ahead of the Intel Core i7-2630QM (1005, +0.1%) but behind the Intel Processor N100 (1007, -0.1%). The two CPUs are separated by only 8 points in average benchmark score, yet the i5-2300 wins all five recorded head-to-head tests.

The consistency of the Intel lead is worth noting. In every test, regardless of thread count or workload type, the i5-2300 posts a higher score. This suggests that the Sandy Bridge architecture's superior IPC is not offset by the FX-9830P's higher clocks or newer memory standard. Even in a hypothetical scenario where the AMD chip's DDR4 support could help, the benchmark data does not reflect any such benefit. The FX-9830P's sole recorded Geekbench scores, 1606 multi-core and 605 single-core, cannot be compared directly, as no Geekbench results exist for the i5-2300 in this data set.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i5-2300 wins in both recorded single-core tests. It scores 416 versus 396 in Cinebench R23 single-core (5.1% higher) and 174 versus 166 in Cinebench R20 single-core (4.8% higher).

Q: Is the AMD FX-9830P more power efficient?

A: Yes. The FX-9830P has a 35W TDP, while the i5-2300 is rated at 95W. This makes the AMD part significantly easier to cool in a mobile chassis, though it sacrifices performance in exchange.

Q: Do these CPUs support the same memory type?

A: No. The i5-2300 uses DDR3 over a dual-channel bus, while the FX-9830P supports DDR4 with a rated memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The benchmark data shows that the newer memory standard does not translate into a performance win for AMD.

Q: How do these processors compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The i5-2300's average score of 1014 puts it 0.2% ahead of the Intel Xeon W5580 and Intel Core i7-2675QM, and 0.3% behind the Intel Core i3-4160. The FX-9830P's average of 1006 is exactly level with the Intel Core i7-880 and Intel Core i5-10210Y, 0.1% ahead of the i7-2630QM, and 0.1% behind the Intel Processor N100.

Q: Which processor has more cache?

A: The i5-2300 has a shared 6MB L3 cache, while the FX-9830P has no L3 cache at all. However, the AMD chip has 320KB of L1 and 1MB of L2 per module, whereas the Intel chip has 64KB of L1 and 256KB of L2 per core.

Q: Are both processors still in production?

A: No. Both are marked as end-of-life. The i5-2300 was released on January 8, 2011, and the FX-9830P followed on May 30, 2016.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i5-2300 is the faster processor in every measurable CPU workload. It wins all five head-to-head tests, with margins between 4.8% and 5.1%, and its average benchmark score of 1014 is 8 points higher than the FX-9830P's 1006. For anyone building a system where raw compute performance matters, whether for multi-threaded rendering or single-threaded responsiveness, the i5-2300 is the correct choice based on this data.

The AMD FX-9830P's case rests entirely on its 35W TDP, which is 60W lower than the Intel part's 95W rating. In a mobile or ultra-compact desktop environment where cooling and power delivery are constrained, the FX-9830P is the more practical option. Its 3.00 GHz base and 3.70 GHz boost clocks are higher than the i5-2300's 2.80 GHz and 3.10 GHz, but those clocks do not overcome the Intel architecture's efficiency advantage in the recorded tests.

For desktop users with standard cooling, the i5-2300 is the clear winner. It offers a 5% performance lead across the board, does not require a newer DDR4 platform, and its 6MB of L3 cache gives it a structural advantage in cache-sensitive workloads. The FX-9830P is only recommended for scenarios where the 35W TDP is a hard requirement, such as a low-power mobile system. In every other context, the data says to pick the Intel Core i5-2300.