AMD PRO A10-8850B vs Intel Core i5-3450S Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear single-directional outcome: the Intel Core i5-3450S wins every one of the five shared test workloads. There is no benchmark in the head-to-head set where the AMD PRO A10-8850B posts a higher score. The most consistent pattern is the margin: across all tests, the Intel part leads by roughly 17.4% to 17.6%. This uniformity suggests the performance gap is structural rather than workload-specific.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i5-3450S scores 377 against the PRO A10-8850B’s 321, a 17.4% advantage. That same multi-core test pattern repeats in Cinebench R20, where the Intel chip records 1573 versus 1339, a 17.5% lead. The Cinebench R23 multi-core run shows 3747 versus 3189, again a 17.5% gap. The single-core tests tell the same story: R20 single-core has Intel at 222 against AMD’s 189, a 17.5% delta, and R23 single-core shows 529 versus 450, a 17.6% margin.

Looking at the broader benchmark set, the i5-3450S also carries additional scores that the AMD part does not have in this data pack. The Intel chip posts a Geekbench multi-core score of 1712 and a single-core score of 581, plus a Cinebench R15 single-core score of 53. The PRO A10-8850B has no corresponding Geekbench or R15 single-core entries, so direct comparison on those tests is not possible from the provided data. However, the consistency of the five shared tests leaves little ambiguity about relative performance.

The average benchmark scores place both processors nearly identically in the aggregate: the i5-3450S averages 1099, while the PRO A10-8850B averages 1098. This near-equality in the average is a statistical artifact of the different test sets included in each average, not a reflection of head-to-head parity. When the same workloads are run on both chips, the Intel part is consistently and decisively ahead. The nearest-rival data reinforces this: the two processors are listed as rivals of each other with a deltaPct of 0.1% in the i5-3450S’s rival list and -0.1% in the PRO A10-8850B’s list, based on their average scores. But that aggregate comparison hides the fact that every common test favors Intel.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design schools. The Intel Core i5-3450S is built on the Ivy Bridge architecture using a 22 nm process node from Intel’s own foundry. The AMD PRO A10-8850B uses the Steamroller architecture on a 28 nm node from GlobalFoundries. The process-node advantage gives Intel a smaller die: 160 mm² versus 245 mm² for AMD. Transistor counts also differ substantially, with the Intel chip carrying 1,400 million transistors while the AMD chip packs 2,411 million. The AMD die is larger and has more transistors, yet it still loses every benchmark, which points to differences in microarchitectural efficiency rather than raw transistor budget.

Both CPUs have four cores and four threads. Base and boost clocks tell a different story: the AMD part runs at 3.90 GHz base and 4.10 GHz boost, while the Intel chip runs at 2.80 GHz base and 3.50 GHz boost. The AMD part has significantly higher clock speeds on paper, yet the Intel part wins all shared tests. That outcome indicates the Ivy Bridge cores deliver more work per clock cycle than the Steamroller cores. The Intel chip also has a lower TDP at 65 watts versus 95 watts for the AMD part, meaning the higher-performing chip also draws less power.

Cache hierarchies differ markedly. The Intel chip has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD chip has 256 KB of L1 total and 4 MB of L2 total, with no L3 cache listed. The absence of L3 cache on the AMD part is a notable disadvantage for workloads that benefit from a large shared cache pool. The Intel chip’s 6 MB shared L3 gives it a substantial caching resource that the AMD part entirely lacks.

Memory support is DDR3 on both, and both use dual-channel memory buses. The AMD chip lists a memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s, while the Intel chip does not have a bandwidth figure in the data. Both support PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. Integrated graphics differ: the Intel chip has Intel HD 2500, while the AMD chip has Radeon R7. Neither chip supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Production status and release timing also differ. The Intel chip was released in April 2012, while the AMD part arrived in September 2015. The AMD part is marked as end-of-life, while the Intel chip’s production status is not specified. The Intel part uses the LGA 1155 socket, while the AMD part uses FM2+.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The Intel Core i5-3450S wins all five head-to-head benchmarks, with margins ranging from 17.4% to 17.6%. The AMD PRO A10-8850B does not win a single shared test. If the decision rests purely on compute performance as measured by Cinebench and Geekbench, the Intel chip is the correct choice.

The Intel advantage appears in both single-core and multi-core workloads. The R20 single-core delta of 17.5% and the R23 single-core delta of 17.6% show that even in lightly threaded tasks, the Ivy Bridge architecture outperforms Steamroller despite the AMD chip’s higher clock speeds. The multi-core deltas of 17.4% to 17.5% confirm that the Intel chip also scales better across all four cores.

Power efficiency further favors Intel. The i5-3450S delivers higher performance at 65 watts TDP, while the AMD part consumes 95 watts. That means the Intel chip achieves its benchmark wins with 30 watts less thermal headroom. For any system builder concerned with cooling or power delivery, the Intel chip is the more attractive option.

The AMD part does have a few redeeming characteristics, but they are not reflected in the benchmark scores. It has a higher base clock (3.90 GHz versus 2.80 GHz) and a higher boost clock (4.10 GHz versus 3.50 GHz). It also has a larger transistor count (2,411 million versus 1,400 million) and a larger die. However, none of these advantages translate into a single benchmark win. The Intel chip’s architectural efficiency and its 6 MB of shared L3 cache appear to be decisive factors.

The verdict is straightforward: choose the Intel Core i5-3450S for any workload represented by the Cinebench and Geekbench suites. The AMD PRO A10-8850B offers no performance advantage in any measured test.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i5-3450S wins all multi-core tests. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows 377 versus 321, a 17.4% lead; Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 1573 versus 1339, a 17.5% lead; and Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 3747 versus 3189, a 17.5% lead.

Q: Does the AMD processor win in any benchmark?

A: No. In the head-to-head benchmark set, the AMD PRO A10-8850B has zero wins across five tests. The Intel chip wins all five.

Q: How do the clock speeds compare?

A: The AMD PRO A10-8850B has a base clock of 3.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.10 GHz. The Intel Core i5-3450S has a base clock of 2.80 GHz and a boost clock of 3.50 GHz. Despite the AMD chip’s higher clocks, it loses all benchmarks.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The Intel Core i5-3450S has a TDP of 65 watts, while the AMD PRO A10-8850B has a TDP of 95 watts. The Intel chip delivers higher performance with a 30-watt lower TDP.

Q: Do both processors have the same core and thread counts?

A: Yes, both have 4 cores and 4 threads. The performance difference comes from architecture, cache, and efficiency rather than core count.

Q: What cache does each processor have?

A: The Intel chip has 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 6 MB shared L3. The AMD chip has 256 KB L1 total and 4 MB L2 total, with no L3 cache listed.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Core i5-3450S — all measured compute workloads. Every benchmark in the head-to-head set favors the Intel chip. Multi-core rendering in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 all go to Intel by approximately 17.5%. Single-core tests in R20 and R23 also favor Intel by similar margins. The Intel chip’s 6 MB shared L3 cache and Ivy Bridge architecture give it a consistent edge across both threaded and lightly threaded tasks. Additionally, the Intel chip’s 65-watt TDP makes it the more power-efficient option for sustained workloads.

AMD PRO A10-8850B — no benchmark wins, but some nominal advantages. The AMD chip does not win any test in the head-to-head set. Its higher base and boost clocks (3.90 GHz and 4.10 GHz) do not translate into measured performance advantages. The chip does have a larger transistor count (2,411 million) and a larger die size (245 mm²), but these are not performance metrics. The AMD part also has a listed memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s, a figure not provided for the Intel chip. For users prioritizing the Radeon R7 integrated graphics over the Intel HD 2500, the AMD part has that feature, but no benchmark data is provided for graphics performance.

Workload split summary. For Cinebench-based rendering workloads, both multi-core and single-core, the Intel chip is the only rational choice based on the data. The AMD chip offers no scenario in these benchmarks where it comes out ahead. The only areas where the AMD part could be considered are those not covered by the benchmark set: its Radeon R7 integrated graphics, its higher clock speeds for non-benchmarked tasks, or its end-of-life production status which may be irrelevant to performance. Strictly from the numbers, the Intel Core i5-3450S wins every measurable comparison.