A10-9620P vs Core i7-7Y75

A10-9620P vs Core i7-7Y75 Performance Spectrum

A10-9620P

4 / 4

2,514

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i7-7Y75

2 / 4

2,534

+0.8%

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.

A10-9620P vs Core i7-7Y75 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.

A10-9620P vs Core i7-7Y75: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A10-9620P

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 2W instead of 5W, a 3W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R5, while Core i7-7Y75 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,514 vs 2,534).

Core i7-7Y75

2016

Why buy it

✅+0.8% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than A10-9620P across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Launch MSRP is still $393 MSRP, while A10-9620P mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌125% higher power demand at 4.5W vs 2W.
❌No integrated graphics, while A10-9620P can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is A10-9620P better than Core i7-7Y75?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A10-9620P is ahead with a 3.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i7-7Y75 pulls ahead with 0.8% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i7-7Y75 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.8% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

A10-9620P is the easy recommendation for a fresh desktop build. A10-9620P comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $393 MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i7-7Y75 only looks good on raw value math because it is a cheap legacy laptop chip, not because it is a real desktop gaming recommendation. It simply does not keep up in modern games, especially when the gap is already 3.2% in the shared gaming data.

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

A10-9620P makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2016). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A10-9620P vs Core i7-7Y75 Technical Specifications

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

A10-9620P

The A10-9620P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FP4. Thermal design power (TDP): 2 MB. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 2,514 points. Launch price was $130.

Core i7-7Y75

The Core i7-7Y75 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 August 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.3 GHz, with boost up to 3.6 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1515. Thermal design power (TDP): 4.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,534 points. Launch price was $393.

⚡

Processing Power

The A10-9620P packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i7-7Y75 offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the A10-9620P has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.4 GHz on the A10-9620P versus 3.6 GHz on the Core i7-7Y75 — a 5.7% clock advantage for the Core i7-7Y75 (base: 2.5 GHz vs 1.3 GHz). The A10-9620P uses the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Core i7-7Y75 uses Kaby Lake (2016−2019) (14 nm). In PassMark, the A10-9620P scores 2,514 against the Core i7-7Y75's 2,534 — a 0.8% lead for the Core i7-7Y75.

Feature	A10-9620P	Core i7-7Y75
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	3.4 GHz	3.6 GHz+6%
Base Clock	2.5 GHz+92%	1.3 GHz
L3 Cache	—	4 MB
L2 Cache	2 MB+300%	512 kB
Process	28 nm	14 nm-50%
Architecture	Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)	Kaby Lake (2016−2019)
PassMark	2,514	2,534
Geekbench 6 Single	485	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A10-9620P uses the FP4 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i7-7Y75 uses FCBGA1515 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	A10-9620P	Core i7-7Y75
Socket	FP4	FCBGA1515
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-1866	—
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	8	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (A10-9620P) / not specified (Core i7-7Y75). The A10-9620P includes integrated graphics (Radeon R5), while the Core i7-7Y75 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A10-9620P targets Laptop. Direct competitor: A10-9620P rivals Core i3-7100U.