A10-6700 vs Core i3-4350T

A10-6700 vs Core i3-4350T Performance Spectrum

A10-6700

4 / 4

3,109

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i3-4350T

2 / 4

3,142

+1.1%

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.

A10-6700 vs Core i3-4350T 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.

A10-6700 vs Core i3-4350T: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A10-6700

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i3-4350T.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,109 vs 3,142).
❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.

Core i3-4350T

2014

Why buy it

✅+1.1% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than A10-6700 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Launch MSRP is still $138 MSRP, while A10-6700 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A10-6700.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-4350T better than A10-6700?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A10-6700 is ahead with a 4.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-4350T pulls ahead with 1.1% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-4350T is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core i3-4350T is the better buy right now. Core i3-4350T comes in at an unclear MSRP at $138 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 1.1% better PassMark. The compromise is that A10-6700 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 4.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (22.8 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Core i3-4350T makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2013) 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.

A10-6700 vs Core i3-4350T Technical Specifications

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

A10-6700

The A10-6700 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Richland (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.7 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1866. Passmark benchmark score: 3,109 points. Launch price was $130.

Core i3-4350T

The Core i3-4350T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 11 May 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.1 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1150. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1333/1600, DDR3L-1333/1600. Passmark benchmark score: 3,142 points. Launch price was $138.

⚡

Processing Power

The A10-6700 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i3-4350T offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the A10-6700 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the A10-6700 versus 3.1 GHz on the Core i3-4350T — a 32.4% clock advantage for the A10-6700 (base: 3.7 GHz vs 3.1 GHz). The A10-6700 uses the Richland (2013−2014) architecture (32 nm), while the Core i3-4350T uses Haswell (2013−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the A10-6700 scores 3,109 against the Core i3-4350T's 3,142 — a 1.1% lead for the Core i3-4350T. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A10-6700 vs 4 MB (total) on the Core i3-4350T.

Feature	A10-6700	Core i3-4350T
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+39%	3.1 GHz
Base Clock	3.7 GHz+19%	3.1 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	4 MB (total)
L2 Cache	4096 kB+1500%	256 kB (per core)
Process	32 nm	22 nm-31%
Architecture	Richland (2013−2014)	Haswell (2013−2015)
PassMark	3,109	3,142+1%
Geekbench 6 Single	438	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A10-6700 uses the FM2 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i3-4350T uses LGA1150 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1866 on the A10-6700 versus DDR3-1600 on the Core i3-4350T — the A10-6700 supports 16.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 32 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes.

Feature	A10-6700	Core i3-4350T
Socket	FM2	LGA1150
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1866+17%	DDR3-1600
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	32 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A10-6700) vs VT-x, VT-d (Core i3-4350T). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 8670D (A10-6700) and HD Graphics 4600 (Core i3-4350T) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A10-6700 targets Budget, Core i3-4350T targets Desktop. Direct competitor: A10-6700 rivals Core i3-3240.