A10-5700 vs Core m3-8100Y

A10-5700 vs Core m3-8100Y Performance Spectrum

A10-5700

4 / 4

2,747

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core m3-8100Y

2 / 4

2,767

+0.7%

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

A10-5700 vs Core m3-8100Y FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

A10-5700 vs Core m3-8100Y: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

A10-5700

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 65W instead of 512W, a 447W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 7660D, while Core m3-8100Y needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (true), unlike Core m3-8100Y.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,747 vs 2,767).

Core m3-8100Y

2018

Why buy it

✅+0.7% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than A10-5700 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌687.7% higher power demand at 512W vs 65W.
❌No integrated graphics, while A10-5700 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A10-5700.

Quick Answers

So, is Core m3-8100Y better than A10-5700?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A10-5700 is ahead with a 6.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core m3-8100Y pulls ahead with 0.7% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core m3-8100Y is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core m3-8100Y still makes the most sense overall. Core m3-8100Y comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.7% better PassMark.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core m3-8100Y makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2018 vs 2012) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 4 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A10-5700 vs Core m3-8100Y Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

A10-5700

The A10-5700 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.4 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,747 points. Launch price was $130.

Core m3-8100Y

The Core m3-8100Y is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 August 2018 (7 years ago). It is based on the Amber Lake-Y (2018−2021) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1515. Thermal design power (TDP): 5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,767 points. Launch price was $281.

⚡

Processing Power

The A10-5700 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core m3-8100Y offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the A10-5700 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4 GHz on the A10-5700 versus 3.4 GHz on the Core m3-8100Y — a 16.2% clock advantage for the A10-5700 (base: 3.4 GHz vs 1.1 GHz). The A10-5700 uses the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Core m3-8100Y uses Amber Lake-Y (2018−2021) (14 nm). In PassMark, the A10-5700 scores 2,747 against the Core m3-8100Y's 2,767 — a 0.7% lead for the Core m3-8100Y. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A10-5700 vs 4 MB on the Core m3-8100Y.

Feature	A10-5700	Core m3-8100Y
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	4 GHz+18%	3.4 GHz
Base Clock	3.4 GHz+209%	1.1 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	4 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)+100%	512 kB
Process	32 nm	14 nm-56%
Architecture	Trinity (2012−2013)	Amber Lake-Y (2018−2021)
PassMark	2,747	2,767

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A10-5700 uses the FM2 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core m3-8100Y uses FCBGA1515 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	A10-5700	Core m3-8100Y
Socket	FM2	FCBGA1515
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	1866	—
Max RAM Capacity	64	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: true (A10-5700) / not specified (Core m3-8100Y). The A10-5700 includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 7660D), while the Core m3-8100Y requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: A10-5700 rivals Core i3-3220.