A10-7890K vs Core i3-1000NG4

A10-7890K vs Core i3-1000NG4 Performance Spectrum

A10-7890K

4 / 4

3,537

+0.2%

Athlon II X3 460

Athlon II X4 641

Athlon X4 850

Ryzen Embedded R1305G

Ryzen 7 6800HS

Ryzen AI Max 390

Ryzen 9 9955HX3D

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i3-1000NG4

2 / 4

3,530

0.0%

Core i7-620M

Core 2 Duo T6670

Celeron Dual-Core T1400

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.

A10-7890K vs Core i3-1000NG4 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.

A10-7890K vs Core i3-1000NG4: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A10-7890K

2016

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +13.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R7, while Core i3-1000NG4 needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i3-1000NG4.

Trade-offs

❌955.6% higher power demand at 95W vs 9W.

Core i3-1000NG4

2020

Why buy it

✅Draws 9W instead of 95W, a 86W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than A10-7890K across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (3,530 vs 3,537).
❌No integrated graphics, while A10-7890K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A10-7890K.

Quick Answers

So, is A10-7890K better than Core i3-1000NG4?

Yes. A10-7890K is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 13.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.2% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, A10-7890K is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 13.9% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A10-7890K is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

A10-7890K still makes the most sense overall. A10-7890K comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 13.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Core i3-1000NG4 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2016). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A10-7890K vs Core i3-1000NG4 Technical Specifications

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

A10-7890K

The A10-7890K is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 11 January 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Godaveri (2014−2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 4 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FM2+. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-2133. Passmark benchmark score: 3,537 points. Launch price was $150.

Core i3-1000NG4

The Core i3-1000NG4 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 18 March 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Ice Lake-Y (2020) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1044. Thermal design power (TDP): 9 Watt. Memory support: LPDDR4-3733. Passmark benchmark score: 3,530 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The A10-7890K packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i3-1000NG4 offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the A10-7890K has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the A10-7890K versus 3.2 GHz on the Core i3-1000NG4 — a 29.3% clock advantage for the A10-7890K (base: 4 GHz vs 1.1 GHz). The A10-7890K uses the Godaveri (2014−2016) architecture (28 nm), while the Core i3-1000NG4 uses Ice Lake-Y (2020) (10 nm). In PassMark, the A10-7890K scores 3,537 against the Core i3-1000NG4's 3,530 — a 0.2% lead for the A10-7890K. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A10-7890K vs 4 MB (total) on the Core i3-1000NG4.

Feature	A10-7890K	Core i3-1000NG4
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+34%	3.2 GHz
Base Clock	4 GHz+264%	1.1 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	4 MB (total)
L2 Cache	4096 kB+1500%	256 kB (per core)
Process	28 nm	10 nm-64%
Architecture	Godaveri (2014−2016)	Ice Lake-Y (2020)
PassMark	3,537	3,530
Geekbench 6 Single	600	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A10-7890K uses the FM2+ socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i3-1000NG4 uses BGA1044 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	A10-7890K	Core i3-1000NG4
Socket	FM2+	BGA1044
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-2133	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (A10-7890K) / not specified (Core i3-1000NG4). The A10-7890K includes integrated graphics (Radeon R7), while the Core i3-1000NG4 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A10-7890K targets Budget. Direct competitor: A10-7890K rivals Core i3-6100.