A10-7890K vs Core i3-4160

A10-7890K vs Core i3-4160 Performance Spectrum

A10-7890K

4 / 4

3,537

+0.9%

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 i3-4160

2 / 4

3,506

0.0%

Core i5-3439Y

Core i7-3537U

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 i3-4160 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 i3-4160: 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: +4.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌75.9% higher power demand at 95W vs 54W.

Core i3-4160

2014

Why buy it

✅Draws 54W instead of 95W, a 41W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than A10-7890K across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (3,506 vs 3,537).
❌Launch MSRP is still $117 MSRP, while A10-7890K mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Quick Answers

So, is A10-7890K better than Core i3-4160?

Yes. A10-7890K is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 4.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.9% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, 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 4.3% 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 0.9% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

A10-7890K is still the much better call for a fresh build. A10-7890K comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $117 MSRP, and it still gives you a 4.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i3-4160 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2014 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (30.0 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on LGA1150.

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

A10-7890K makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2014) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A10-7890K vs Core i3-4160 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 i3-4160

The Core i3-4160 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 21 July 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 3.6 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1150. Thermal design power (TDP): 54 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,506 points. Launch price was $133.

⚡

Processing Power

The A10-7890K packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i3-4160 offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the A10-7890K has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the A10-7890K versus 3.6 GHz on the Core i3-4160 — a 17.7% clock advantage for the A10-7890K (base: 4 GHz vs 3.6 GHz). The A10-7890K uses the Godaveri (2014−2016) architecture (28 nm), while the Core i3-4160 uses Haswell (2013−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the A10-7890K scores 3,537 against the Core i3-4160's 3,506 — a 0.9% lead for the A10-7890K. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 600 vs 1,100, a 58.8% lead for the Core i3-4160 that directly translates to higher frame rates. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A10-7890K vs 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-4160.

Feature	A10-7890K	Core i3-4160
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+19%	3.6 GHz
Base Clock	4 GHz+11%	3.6 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	3 MB (total)
L2 Cache	4096 kB+1500%	256 kB (per core)
Process	28 nm	22 nm-21%
Architecture	Godaveri (2014−2016)	Haswell (2013−2015)
PassMark	3,537	3,506
Geekbench 6 Single	600	1,100+83%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A10-7890K uses the FM2+ socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i3-4160 uses LGA1150 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-2133 on the A10-7890K versus DDR3-1600 on the Core i3-4160 — the A10-7890K supports 33.3% 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. Chipset compatibility: A55,A68H,A75,A78,A85X,A88X (A10-7890K) and H81,B85,Q85,H87,Q87,Z87,H97,Z97 (Core i3-4160).

Feature	A10-7890K	Core i3-4160
Socket	FM2+	LGA1150
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-2133+33%	DDR3-1600
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	32 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the A10-7890K has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A10-7890K) vs VT-x, EPT (Core i3-4160). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon R7 (A10-7890K) and HD Graphics 4400 (Core i3-4160) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A10-7890K targets Budget, Core i3-4160 targets Budget Desktop. Direct competitor: A10-7890K rivals Core i3-6100; Core i3-4160 rivals FX-6300.