Intel 3870: AMD A8-3870 APU vs Intel Core i5-12400F

17 января, 2023

CPU-Z Benchmark for AMD A8-3870 (1T)

Best CPU performance — 64-bit — December 2022

AMD A8-3870 (1T)

Back to validation

Intel Core i9-13900K

Intel Core i7-13700K

Intel Core i9-12900KS

Intel Core i9-12900KF

Intel Core i9-12900K

Intel Core i7-12700KF

Intel Core i7-12700K

AMD Ryzen 9 7950X

Intel Core i5-12600K

Intel Core i5-12600KF

Intel Core i7-12700

Intel Core i7-12700F

Intel Core i9-12900H

Intel Core i7-12700H

Intel Core i5-12500

Intel Core i5-12500H

Intel Core i9-11900K

Intel Core i5-12490F

Intel Core i5-12400

Intel Core i3-12100

Intel Core i5-12400F

AMD Ryzen 9 5950X

Intel Core i3-12100F

AMD Ryzen 9 5900X

AMD Ryzen 7 5800X

Intel Core i7-11700K

Intel Core i7-11700KF

AMD Ryzen 7 5700X

Intel Core i5-11600K

AMD Ryzen 5 5600X

Intel Core i7-11700

Intel Core i7-11700F

AMD Ryzen 7 5700G

AMD Ryzen 5 5600

AMD Ryzen 7 5800X3D

AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX

AMD Ryzen 5 5600G

AMD Ryzen 7 6800H

Intel Core i9-10900K

Intel Core i7-11800H

Intel Core i9-10850K

Intel Core i7-10700KF

Intel Core i5-11400

AMD Ryzen 5 5500

Intel Core i9-9900KF

Intel Core i5-11400F

Intel Core i7-9700KF

Intel Core i5-11400H

AMD Ryzen 7 5800H

Intel Core i7-10700K

Intel Core i7-9700K

Intel Core i9-9900K

AMD Ryzen 5 5600H

Intel Core i5-10600KF

Intel Core i5-9600KF

Intel Core i5-10600K

Intel Core i7-10700

Intel Core i5-11300H

Intel Core i7-10700F

Intel Core i7-1165G7

Intel Core i7-9700

AMD Ryzen 9 3950X

AMD Ryzen 9 3900X

Intel Core i5-9600K

AMD Ryzen 7 3800X

Intel Core i7-8700K

AMD Ryzen 7 3700X

AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 4650G

Intel Core i5-8600K

Intel Core i5-1135G7

AMD Ryzen 5 3600X

Intel Core i7-7700K

AMD Ryzen 7 4800H

AMD Ryzen 5 3600

AMD Ryzen 7 5700U

Intel Core i7-8700

AMD Ryzen 5 3500X

AMD Ryzen 5 3500

Intel Core i3-1115G4

AMD Ryzen 5 5500U

Intel Core i7-10750H

Intel Core i3-9100F

Intel Core i3-10105F

Intel Core i7-6700K

Intel Core i5-8500

AMD Ryzen 5 4600H

Intel Core i5-9400

Intel Core i5-10400

Intel Core i3-10100

Intel Core i5-9400F

Intel Core i5-6600K

Intel Core i3-10100F

AMD Ryzen 7 2700X

Intel Core i5-10400F

Intel Core i7-4790K

AMD Ryzen 3 3100 4-Core

Intel Core i5-10300H

Intel Core i5-8400

Intel Core i7-9750H

AMD Ryzen 5 2600X

Intel Core i7-7700

Intel Core i7-8750H

Intel Core i5-4690K

AMD Ryzen 3 3200G

AMD Ryzen 5 3400G

Intel Core i5-9300H

AMD Ryzen 5 2600

Intel Core i3-8100

Intel Core i5-7500

Intel Core i7-10510U

Intel Core i5-8300H

AMD Ryzen 5 1600X

Intel Core i7-8565U

AMD Ryzen 3 2200G

Intel Core i7-4770K

Intel Core i5-4690

Intel Core i5-10210U

AMD Ryzen 5 2400G

Intel Core i7-4790

Intel Core i5-1035G1

Intel Core i7-6700

AMD Ryzen 7 2700

Intel Core i7-4770

AMD Ryzen 7 1700

Intel Core i5-8265U

AMD Ryzen 5 1600

Intel Core i5-4590

Intel Core i3-1005G1

AMD Ryzen 5 3550H with

Intel Core i5-3570K

Intel Core i5-6500

Intel Core i5-7400

Intel Core i7-3770K

Intel Xeon E3-1231 v3

Intel Core i7-8550U

Intel Core i5-4570

Intel Core i3-7100

AMD Ryzen 3 1200

Intel Xeon E5-2666 v3

Intel Core i5-3570

Intel Core i3-10110U

Intel Core i5-2500K

Intel Core i7-3770

AMD Ryzen 7 3750H with

Intel Core i7-2600K

Intel Core i7-7700HQ

Intel Core i5-8250U

Intel Core i5-7300HQ

Intel Core i5-6400

Intel Core i3-6100

Intel Core i5-4460

Intel Core i5-3470

Intel Xeon E5-2640 v3

AMD Ryzen 5 3500U with

Intel Core i5-4440

Intel Xeon E3-1230 V2

Intel Core i3-4170

Intel Core i5-2500

Intel Pentium G4560

AMD Athlon 3000G

Intel Core i7-2600

Intel Core i3-4160

Intel Xeon E5-2689

Intel Core i7-6700HQ

Intel Core i7-7500U

Intel Xeon E5-2670 v3

Intel Core i5-2400

Intel Xeon E5-2620 v3

Intel Xeon E5-2650 v2

Intel Core i3-4130

Intel Core i5-3330

AMD Ryzen 3 3250U

Intel Core i5-7200U

Intel Core i3-3240

Intel Core i3-3220

Intel Core i5-6300U

Intel Core i3-2120

Intel Core i5-3230M

Intel Core i3-2100

Intel Core 2 Duo E8400

Intel Core i5-6200U

Intel Core i5-2520M

Intel Core i5-5200U

Intel Core 2 Quad Q9550

Intel Core i5 650

Intel Core 2 Duo E7500

Intel Core i5-3210M

AMD FX -8350

Intel Core i5-2450M

AMD FX -8320

Intel Core i5-2410M

AMD FX -6300

Intel Core i5-4210U

AMD FX -8300

Intel Core 2 Quad Q6600

Intel Core i3-7020U

Intel Core i5-4200U

Intel Core i3-5005U

Intel Core i3-6006U

(YOU) AMD A8-3870

Intel Core i3-4005U

A8-3870 vs Core i7-13700K — How Many FPS

Key Differences

In short — Core i7-13700K outperforms A8-3870 on the selected game parameters. We do not have the prices of both CPUs to compare value.

Advantages of AMD A8-3870

  • Consumes up to 20% less energy than Intel Core i7-13700K — 100 vs 125 Watts

Advantages of Intel Core i7-13700K

  • Performs up to 88% better in Minecraft than A8-3870 — 1945 vs 1037 FPS
  • Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD A8-3870 — 24 vs 4 threads
  • Works without a dedicated GPU, while AMD A8-3870 doesn’t have integrated graphics

Minecraft

Resolution

1920×1080

Game Graphics

High

A8-3870

FPS

1037

53%

Value, $/FPS

Price, $

Core i7-13700K

Desktop • Sep 27th, 2022

FPS

1945

100%

Value, $/FPS

$0.22/FPS

100%

Price, $

$427.99

100%

FPS and Value Winner

Intel Core i7-13700K Desktop Processor 16 cores (8 P-cores + 8 E-cores) 30M Cache, up to 5. 4 GHz

Buy for $427.99 on Amazon

In Stock

Updated 36 minutes ago

TOP 5 Games

Resolution

1920×1080

Game Graphics

High

A8-3870Core i7-13700K

Desktop • Sep 27th, 2022

771

FPS

1470

FPS

League of Legends

330

FPS

649

FPS

VALORANT

188

FPS

374

FPS

Grand Theft Auto V

201

FPS

418

FPS

Apex Legends

204

FPS

404

FPS

Fortnite

Geekbench 5 Benchmarks

A8-3870

Single-Core

396

19%

Multi-Core

1335

7%

Core i7-13700K

Desktop • Sep 27th, 2022

Single-Core

2085

100%

Multi-Core

18290

100%

AMD A8-3870

vs

Intel Core i7-13700K
Unknown Release Date Sep 27th, 2022
Not Available Collection Core i7
Llano Codename Raptor Lake
Not Available Socket Intel Socket 1700
Segment

Desktop
4 Cores

16
4 Threads

24
3. 0 GHz Base Clock Speed

3.4 GHz
Non-Turbo Turbo Clock Speed 5.4 GHz

100 W

 TDP 125 W
Not Available Process Size 10 nm
Not Available Multiplier 34.0x
None Integrated Graphics

UHD Graphics 770
No Overclockable

Yes

AMD A8-3870 APU or Intel Core i3-6100U

  • Come
  • >
  • Processors
  • >
  • Comparison
  • >
  • A8-3870 APU VS Intel Core I3-6100u
  • A8-3850 APU
    Compare
  • A8-3800 APU
    Compare

Family

  • Core I3-6098P
    Compare
  • Core I3-6167U
    Compare
  • 9000 Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core Core I3-6157U0022 Compare
  • Core i3-6006U
    Compare

Speed ​​in games

A8-3870 APU

40 (+1%)

Core i3-6100U

39. 5

Productivity in games and similar applications, in accordance tests.

The performance of 4 cores, if any, and performance per core has the greatest impact on the result, since most games do not fully use more than 4 cores.

The speed of caches and working with RAM is also important. nine0047

Speed ​​in office use

A8-3870 APU

42.1

Core i3-6100U

43.8 (+4%)

Performance in everyday work such as browsers and office programs.

The performance of 1 core has the greatest impact on the result, since most of these applications use only one, ignoring the rest.

Similarly, many professional applications such as various CADs ignore multi-threaded performance. nine0047

Speed ​​in heavy applications

A8-3870 APU

21.7 (+4%)

Core i3-6100U

20.9

Performance in resource-intensive tasks loading up to 8 cores.

The performance of all cores and their number have the greatest impact on the result, since most of these applications willingly use all the cores and increase the speed accordingly.

At the same time, certain periods of work can be demanding on the performance of one or two cores, for example, applying filters in the editor. nine0047

Data obtained from tests by users who tested their systems with and without overclocking. Thus, you see the average values ​​corresponding to the processor.

Speed ​​of numerical operations

Simple household tasks

A8-3870 APU

31.9

Core i3-6100U

38.4 (+20%)

Demanding games and tasks

A8-3870 APU

16.1 (+10%)

Core i3-6100U

14.6

Extreme

A8-3870 APU

3. 2 (+10%)

Core i3-6100U

2.9

Different tasks require different CPU strengths. A system with few fast cores and low memory latency will be fine for the vast majority of games, but will be inferior to a system with a lot of slow cores in a rendering scenario.

We believe that a minimum of 4/4 (4 physical cores and 4 threads) processor is suitable for a budget gaming PC. At the same time, some games can load it at 100%, slow down and freeze, and performing any tasks in the background will lead to a drop in FPS. nine0047

The budget shopper should ideally aim for a minimum of 4/8 and 6/6. A gamer with a big budget can choose between 6/12, 8/8 and 8/16. Processors with 10 and 12 cores can perform well in games with high frequency and fast memory, but are overkill for such tasks. Also, buying for the future is a dubious undertaking, since in a few years many slow cores may not provide sufficient gaming performance.

When choosing a processor for your work, consider how many cores your programs use. For example, photo and video editors can use 1-2 cores when working with filtering, and rendering or converting in the same editors already uses all threads. nine0047

Data obtained from tests by users who tested their systems both with overclocking (maximum value in the table) and without (minimum). A typical result is shown in the middle, the more filled in the color bar, the better the average result among all tested systems.

Features

Main

Socket Installed in motherboards with a suitable socket. Note that a socket is not guaranteed to be compatible. The manufacturer may not add support to the BIOS. nine0101

 BGA 1356
Manufacturer Firm AMD Intel

Performance

nine0098 Missing

Cores The total number of physical cores. 4 2
ThreadsNumber of threads. The number of logical processor cores that the operating system sees. 4 4
Multi-Threading Technology With Intel’s Hyper-threading and AMD’s SMT technology, one physical core is recognized as two logical cores in the operating system, thereby increasing processor performance in multi-threaded applications. Hyper-threading (note that some games may not work well with Hyper-threading, for maximum FPS you can try disabling the technology in the BIOS of the motherboard).
Base frequencyThe guaranteed frequency of all cores (P-cores in the case of the corresponding architecture) of the processor at maximum load. It is important to remember that speed and frequency are not directly related. For example, a new processor at a lower frequency may be faster than an old one at a higher one. nine0101

 3 GHz 2.3 GHz

Cache and RAM

Video core

PCI

Detailed information

  • The speed of work in office applications and browsers is increased by 10%.
  • In complex multi-threaded applications, faster and outperforms by 10%. nine0004
  • The number of physical cores is 2 more.
  • The base frequency is 0.7 GHz higher.

    • How are they similar

    • The number of threads is equal.

    Comparison of Intel UHD Graphics 630 and ATI Radeon HD 3870

    Comparative analysis of Intel UHD Graphics 630 and ATI Radeon HD 3870 video cards by all known characteristics in the categories: General information, Specifications, Video outputs and ports, Compatibility, dimensions, requirements, API support, Memory, Technology support.
    Analysis of video card performance by benchmarks: PassMark — G3D Mark, PassMark — G2D Mark, Geekbench — OpenCL, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T -Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike — Graphics Score.
    nine0047

    Intel UHD Graphics 630

    versus

    ATI Radeon HD 3870

    Benefits

    Reasons to choose Intel UHD Graphics 630

    • Newer graphics card, release date difference 9 year(s) 9 month(s)
    • texturing speed(s)

      • more: 28. 8 GTexel / s vs 12.43 GTexel / s

    • A newer manufacturing process for the video card allows it to be more powerful, but with lower power consumption: 14 nm vs 55 nm
    • 7.1 times less power consumption: 15 Watt vs 106 Watt 303 vs 67
    • About 6% more performance in GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames) benchmark: 3309 vs 3131
    • About 6% more performance in GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps) benchmark: 3309 vs 3131

    nine0102

    Issue date 1 September 2017 vs 19 November 2007
    Texturing Speed ​​ 28.8 GTexel/s vs 12.43 GTexel/s
    Process 14 nm vs 55 nm
    Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt vs 106 Watt
    PassMark — G3D Mark 1276 vs 570
    PassMark — G2D Mark 303 vs 67
    GFXBench 4. 0 — T-Rex (Frames) 3309 vs 3131
    GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps) 3309 vs 3131

    Reasons to choose ATI Radeon HD 3870

    • 2.2 times more core clock(s): 777 MHz vs 350 MHz
    • 13.3 times more shader processors: 320 vs 24

      5 Floating point performance

      5 8% more: 497.3 gflops vs 460.8 gflops

    Core Clock 777 MHz vs 350 MHz
    Number of shaders 320 vs 24
    Floating point performance 497.3 gflops vs 460.8 gflops

    Benchmark comparison

    nine0377 GPU 1: Intel UHD Graphics 630
    GPU 2: ATI Radeon HD 3870

    PassMark — G3D Mark
    GPU 1
    GPU 2
    PassMark — G2D Mark
    GPU 1
    GPU 2
    GFXBench 4. 0 — T-Rex (Frames)
    GPU 1
    GPU 2
    GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps)
    GPU 1
    GPU 2

    nine0101

    nine0501

    nine0501

    Name Intel UHD Graphics 630 ATI Radeon HD 3870
    PassMark — G3D Mark 1276 570
    PassMark — G2D Mark 303 67
    Geekbench — OpenCL 5095
    CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s) 28.682
    CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) 356.144
    CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) 1.807
    CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) 21.594
    CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) 29.452
    GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) 1870
    GFXBench 4. 0 — Manhattan (Frames) 1596
    GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames) 3309 3131
    GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) 1870
    GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps) 1596
    GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps) 3309 3131
    3DMark Fire Strike — Graphics Score 423

    Feature comparison

    nine0098 1 September 2017

    nine0501

    nine0098 460. 8 gflops

    nine0102

    nine0102

    Intel UHD Graphics 630 ATI Radeon HD 3870
    Architecture Generation 9. 5 TeraScale
    Codename Coffee Lake GT2 RV670
    Issue date November 19, 2007
    Place in the ranking 1087 1260
    Type Desktop Desktop
    Price at first issue date $269
    Boost core clock 1200 MHz
    Core frequency 350MHz 777MHz
    Floating point performance 497.3 gflops
    Process 14nm 55nm
    Number of shaders 24 320
    Texturing speed 28.8 GTexel/s 12.43 GTexel/s
    Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 106 Watt
    Number of transistors 189 million 666 million
    Video connectors No outputs 2x DVI, 1x S-Video
    Interface PCIe 3. 0 x1 PCIe 2.0 x16
    Length 241 mm
    Additional power connectors 1x 6-pin
    DirectX 12.0 (12_1) 10.0
    OpenGL 4.6 3.3
    Memory bus width 64 / 128 Bit 256 Bit
    Shared memory 1
    Maximum memory size 512MB
    Memory bandwidth 72.

    2024 © All rights reserved