AMD PRO A12-9800 vs Intel Core i5-3470S Comparison

# Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data presents a clear split: Intel Core i5-3470S wins every head-to-head comparison recorded in the database. Of the five shared Cinebench tests, the Intel part takes all five, with no test showing an AMD PRO A12-9800 advantage. The AMD processor does not record a single win in the head-to-head set, while the Intel processor claims a 5-0 sweep.

For single-threaded workloads, the Intel Core i5-3470S leads by a consistent margin. In Cinebench R20 single-core, it scores 220 versus 190 for the AMD PRO A12-9800, a 13.6% advantage. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Intel part reaches 524 points compared to 453 for the AMD chip, again a 13.5% gap. This pattern suggests the Intel architecture delivers higher per-core throughput, which matters for older applications, lightly threaded games, and everyday responsive tasks.

Multi-threaded performance follows the same trajectory. The Intel Core i5-3470S posts 373 points in Cinebench R15 multi-core against 323 for the AMD PRO A12-9800, a 13.4% edge. The gap widens slightly in newer tests: Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 1558 versus 1347 (13.5% difference), and Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 3711 versus 3208 (13.6% difference). Both processors have four cores and four threads, so the multi-core results reflect per-core efficiency rather than additional parallel resources.

The AMD PRO A12-9800 does offer a compensating feature in its integrated graphics. It ships with Radeon R7 graphics, while the Intel Core i5-3470S includes HD 2500. For systems that rely on the integrated GPU, the AMD part likely handles display output and basic graphical tasks more smoothly, though the database does not include graphics benchmarks to quantify this.

In terms of overall positioning, the AMD PRO A12-9800 sits at the 31st percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 1104. The Intel Core i5-3470S holds the 30th percentile with an average score of 1095. These are nearly identical aggregate positions, but the Intel chip achieves this with a lower average score due to its inclusion of Geekbench results, which are not recorded for the AMD part.

# Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design generations and manufacturing processes. The AMD PRO A12-9800 uses the Excavator architecture, codenamed Bristol Ridge, built on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It has a die size of 250 mm² and contains 3,100 million transistors. The Intel Core i5-3470S uses Ivy Bridge, built on a 22 nm process at Intel, with a die size of 133 mm². The database lists no transistor count for the Intel chip.

Both processors feature four cores and four threads, so thread counts match exactly. Clock speeds differ notably: the AMD part runs at 3.80 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost, while the Intel part runs at 2.90 GHz base and 3.60 GHz boost. Despite the AMD chip's higher clocks, the Intel processor wins every benchmark, indicating that Ivy Bridge's per-clock efficiency more than compensates for the lower frequency.

Cache layouts differ significantly. The AMD PRO A12-9800 has 320 KB of L1 cache and 2 MB of L2 cache, with no L3 cache recorded. The Intel Core i5-3470S has 64 KB of L1 cache per core (256 KB total), 256 KB of L2 cache per core (1 MB total), and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel chip's larger aggregate cache, particularly the shared L3, likely contributes to its benchmark advantage.

Memory support also diverges. The AMD part supports DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration with 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel part supports DDR3 memory in dual-channel, with no bandwidth figure recorded in the database. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

PCI Express connectivity differs as well. The AMD PRO A12-9800 provides Gen 3 with 8 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel Core i5-3470S provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The Intel chip offers double the PCIe lanes, which matters for discrete GPUs and expansion cards.

Sockets are incompatible: the AMD chip uses AMD Socket AM4, while the Intel chip uses Intel Socket 1155. Integrated graphics differ as noted: Radeon R7 on the AMD side versus HD 2500 on the Intel side. Both processors have locked multipliers, so neither supports easy overclocking.

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The five shared benchmarks tell a consistent story. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Intel Core i5-3470S scores 373 against 323 for the AMD PRO A12-9800, a 13.4% lead. This is the smallest margin in the set.

Cinebench R20 multi-core shows the Intel part at 1558 versus 1347 for AMD, a 13.5% difference. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 220 versus 190, also 13.6% in favor of Intel. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 3711 versus 3208, a 13.6% edge. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 524 versus 453, again 13.5%.

Every delta sits between 13.4% and 13.6%, making the performance gap remarkably uniform across workloads and benchmark versions. This consistency suggests a fundamental architectural advantage rather than a test-specific quirk. The Intel processor is not faster in any particular niche; it is faster across the board by roughly the same proportion.

The AMD PRO A12-9800 does record results in Cinebench R15 multi-core, R20 multi-core, R20 single-core, R23 multi-core, and R23 single-core, but it lacks a Cinebench R15 single-core score. The Intel part has additional Geekbench results: 1726 multi-core and 599 single-core. These Geekbench scores are not available for the AMD chip, so cross-processor comparison on that test is impossible.

Average benchmark scores place the AMD part at 1104 and the Intel part at 1095, a difference of less than 1%. The Intel chip's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-2670QM (1096, delta -0.1%), Intel Core i7-4610M (1094, delta 0.1%), Intel Core i7-2710QE (1096, delta -0.1%), and Intel Core i7-4600M (1093, delta 0.2%). The AMD chip's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon E5-2603 v3 (1103, delta 0.1%), Intel Pentium Gold G6605 (1103, delta 0.1%), AMD Opteron 3280 (1106, delta -0.2%), and AMD Athlon X4 845 (1106, delta -0.2%).

# FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core i5-3470S wins all multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 3711 versus 3208 for the AMD PRO A12-9800, a 13.6% advantage. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows 1558 versus 1347, a 13.5% edge.

Q: Does the AMD PRO A12-9800 have any benchmark win over the Intel chip?

A: No. The head-to-head record shows 5 wins for the Intel Core i5-3470S and 0 wins for the AMD PRO A12-9800 across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 tests.

Q: How do their cache configurations compare?

A: The AMD PRO A12-9800 has 320 KB of L1 and 2 MB of L2, with no L3 cache. The Intel Core i5-3470S has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor supports DDR4 memory?

A: Only the AMD PRO A12-9800 supports DDR4, with dual-channel memory and 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Core i5-3470S supports DDR3 in dual-channel, with no bandwidth figure recorded.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The AMD PRO A12-9800 runs at 3.80 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost. The Intel Core i5-3470S runs at 2.90 GHz base and 3.60 GHz boost. The AMD chip has higher clocks, yet the Intel chip wins all benchmarks.

Q: How do their integrated graphics compare?

A: The AMD PRO A12-9800 includes Radeon R7 graphics, while the Intel Core i5-3470S includes HD 2500. The database records no graphics benchmarks for either processor.

# The Verdict

The recorded data leads to a straightforward conclusion for raw CPU performance: the Intel Core i5-3470S is the stronger processor. It wins every shared benchmark by a margin between 13.4% and 13.6%, whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded. This consistency across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 indicates that the Intel architecture's efficiency advantage holds regardless of test version or thread count.

Users who prioritize integrated graphics should consider the AMD PRO A12-9800. Its Radeon R7 GPU is a more capable integrated solution than the Intel HD 2500, based on the product naming and positioning in the database. For systems without a discrete graphics card, the AMD part may provide a better visual experience, though no benchmark numbers confirm this.

Users who prioritize memory technology should note the AMD part's DDR4 support. The AMD PRO A12-9800 works with DDR4 memory at 38.4 GB/s, while the Intel Core i5-3470S requires DDR3. If a system build already targets DDR4 platforms, the AMD chip fits that ecosystem.

Users who need PCIe expansion should lean toward the Intel Core i5-3470S. It provides 16 Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, double the 8 lanes available on the AMD PRO A12-9800. This difference matters for discrete graphics cards, NVMe adapters, or other PCIe devices.

The overall percentile positions are nearly identical: 31st for the AMD chip and 30th for the Intel chip. Average scores differ by only 9 points (1104 versus 1095). However, the head-to-head results are unambiguous. The Intel Core i5-3470S delivers superior CPU performance in every measured category, making it the default choice for compute-bound applications. The AMD PRO A12-9800 remains viable only for specific scenarios involving its integrated graphics or DDR4 memory preference.

# Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD PRO A12-9800 | Intel Core i5-3470S |

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

| Architecture | Excavator | Ivy Bridge |

| Codename | Bristol Ridge | Ivy Bridge |

| Process Node | 28 nm | 22 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | Intel |

| Die Size | 250 mm² | 133 mm² |

| Transistors | 3,100 million | Not recorded |

| Base Clock | 3.80 GHz | 2.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.20 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| L1 Cache | 320 KB | 64 KB per core |

| L2 Cache | 2 MB | 256 KB per core |

| L3 Cache | None | 6 MB shared |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR3 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 38.4 GB/s | Not recorded |

| PCIe Lanes | Gen 3, 8 lanes | Gen 3, 16 lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon R7 | Intel HD 2500 |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM4 | Intel Socket 1155 |

| Release Date | 2016-10-02 | 2012-05-31 |

| Part Number | AD980BAUM44AB | SR0TA |