AMD PRO A10-8750B vs Intel Core i5-3320M Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data splits these two processors along clear lines. The AMD PRO A10-8750B wins five of the seven recorded head-to-head comparisons, taking every Cinebench test by a margin between 11.8% and 12%. The Intel Core i5-3320M wins the two Geekbench tests, and it does so decisively: 14% ahead in multi-core and 29.4% ahead in single-core.

For users whose workload leans on Cinebench-style rendering, the AMD PRO A10-8750B is the stronger pick. Its four physical cores, running at a 3.60 GHz base and 4.00 GHz boost clock, deliver consistent leads across the R15, R20, and R23 suites. The data shows a 2525 Cinebench R23 multi-core result against 2258 for the Intel part, a gap that holds steady across every Cinebench iteration.

For Geekbench-oriented tasks, the Intel Core i5-3320M is the clear choice. Despite having only two physical cores, its 589 single-core Geekbench score towers over the AMD's 416, and its 1146 multi-core score beats the AMD's 985. This suggests the Intel architecture extracts more per-thread performance, which matters for lightly threaded applications.

The overall database picture is nearly identical. The AMD PRO A10-8750B sits at the 22nd percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 821. The Intel Core i5-3320M also sits at the 22nd percentile with an average score of 803. Both processors occupy the same performance tier in the broader database, so the choice comes down to workload type rather than overall capability.

Architecture Differences

The AMD PRO A10-8750B uses the Steamroller architecture on a 28 nm process from GlobalFoundries. It is a desktop part with four cores and four threads, no hyper-threading equivalent. The die measures 245 mm² and packs 2,411 million transistors. Cache is organized as 256 KB of L1 and 4 MB of L2, with no L3. Memory support is DDR3 over a dual-channel bus with 34.1 GB/s of bandwidth, and the integrated graphics are Radeon R7. The socket is AMD Socket FM2+.

The Intel Core i5-3320M uses the Ivy Bridge architecture on a 22 nm process from Intel. It is a mobile part with two physical cores and four threads via hyper-threading. The die is much smaller at 118 mm², and no transistor count is recorded. Cache is organized as 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 3 MB of shared L3. Memory support is not specified in the database, but the memory bus is dual-channel. Integrated graphics are Intel HD 4000, and the socket is Intel BGA 1023.

The node advantage goes to Intel at 22 nm versus 28 nm, which explains the smaller die size and lower power envelope. The Intel part has a 35 W TDP against the AMD's 95 W. The AMD part compensates with higher clock speeds: 3.60 GHz base and 4.00 GHz boost versus 2.60 GHz base and 3.30 GHz boost. The AMD also has double the physical cores, which helps in multi-threaded rendering. The Intel counters with hyper-threading and a larger L3 cache.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD PRO A10-8750B dominates the Cinebench suite. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 254 against 227, an 11.9% lead. In R20 multi-core, it scores 1060 against 948, an 11.8% lead. The single-core R20 test shows 149 versus 133, a 12% lead. In R23 multi-core, the AMD posts 2525 against 2258, another 11.8% lead, and in R23 single-core it scores 356 versus 318, an 11.9% lead. Every Cinebench test lands within a narrow band of 11.8% to 12%, indicating a consistent architectural advantage in this workload.

The Intel Core i5-3320M owns the Geekbench results. In Geekbench multi-core, it scores 1146 against 985, a 14% lead for Intel. In Geekbench single-core, the gap widens to 29.4%, with Intel at 589 and AMD at 416. These are the largest margins in either direction across all seven tests.

The split is telling. The Cinebench tests reward the AMD's four physical cores and higher clock speeds. The Geekbench tests reward the Intel's per-core efficiency and hyper-threading. The fact that the AMD wins all five Cinebench tests by nearly the same percentage and loses both Geekbench tests by much larger margins suggests the two architectures handle these workloads very differently.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmarks?

A: The AMD PRO A10-8750B wins five of the seven recorded head-to-head tests. The Intel Core i5-3320M wins two.

Q: How large is the AMD's Cinebench lead?

A: The AMD leads by 11.8% to 12% across all five Cinebench tests, including R15 multi-core, R20 multi-core, R20 single-core, R23 multi-core, and R23 single-core.

Q: What is the Intel's best result?

A: The Intel Core i5-3320M wins Geekbench single-core by 29.4%, scoring 589 against the AMD's 416. It also wins Geekbench multi-core by 14%, scoring 1146 against 985.

Q: How do the two processors compare in the overall database?

A: Both sit at the 22nd percentile of all CPUs. The AMD has an average benchmark score of 821, while the Intel has an average score of 803.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The AMD PRO A10-8750B has 4 cores and 4 threads. The Intel Core i5-3320M has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: Which processor has the higher clock speed?

A: The AMD PRO A10-8750B has a 3.60 GHz base clock and a 4.00 GHz boost clock. The Intel Core i5-3320M has a 2.60 GHz base clock and a 3.30 GHz boost clock.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD PRO A10-8750B wins in sustained multi-threaded rendering workloads. Its four physical cores and higher clock speeds translate directly into Cinebench performance, where it beats the Intel by roughly 12% in every test. This makes it the better choice for tasks like 3D rendering, video encoding, and any workload that scales across multiple cores. The 95 W TDP and desktop socket indicate it is meant to run in a desktop system with adequate cooling, not a constrained mobile chassis.

The Intel Core i5-3320M wins in Geekbench-style workloads that favor per-thread efficiency and memory latency handling. Its 29.4% single-core lead and 14% multi-core lead in Geekbench suggest it handles less parallel, more latency-sensitive applications better. The 35 W TDP and mobile BGA socket indicate it is designed for laptops, where power draw and heat dissipation matter more than raw core count. The hyper-threading on two cores helps it keep up in multi-threaded tests despite having half the physical cores of the AMD.

The database's nearest rival data places each processor among similar-performing parts. The AMD's closest rival is the Intel Xeon E5540, with a 0.1% score difference, and the AMD A10 PRO-7850B, which is 0.8% faster. The Intel's closest rivals include the AMD A10-7700K at 0.2% slower and the AMD Ryzen 3 2200U at 0.2% faster. Neither processor dominates its peer group, so the choice is workload-specific rather than a question of one being clearly superior.

For a desktop user running Cinebench-style rendering, the AMD PRO A10-8750B is the pick. For a mobile user running Geekbench-style applications, the Intel Core i5-3320M is the pick. The data does not support a single universal winner.