
A10-9700

Core i7-975
A10-9700 vs Core i7-975 Performance Spectrum
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.
A10-9700 vs Core i7-975 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.

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Valorant

Among Us

Apex Legends

ARC Raiders

Baldur's Gate 3

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
A10-9700 vs Core i7-975: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
A10-9700
2017Why buy it
- ✅+0.8% higher PassMark.
- ✅Costs $830 less on MSRP ($169 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 495.8% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 21.0 vs 3.5 PassMark/$ ($169 MSRP vs $999 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 130W, a 65W reduction.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i7-975 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
Core i7-975
2009Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +4.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (3,527 vs 3,555).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 3.5 vs 21.0 PassMark/$ ($999 MSRP vs $169 MSRP).
- ❌100% higher power demand at 130W vs 65W.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while A10-9700 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A10-9700.
Quick Answers
So, is A10-9700 better than Core i7-975?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
A10-9700 vs Core i7-975 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

A10-9700
The A10-9700 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 27 July 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 3,555 points. Launch price was $90.

Core i7-975
The Core i7-975 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2 June 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Bloomfield (2008−2010) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 3.33 GHz, with boost up to 3.6 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1366. Thermal design power (TDP): 130 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,527 points. Launch price was $476.
Processing Power
The A10-9700 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, matching the Core i7-975's 4 cores. Boost clocks reach 3.8 GHz on the A10-9700 versus 3.6 GHz on the Core i7-975 — a 5.4% clock advantage for the A10-9700 (base: 3.5 GHz vs 3.33 GHz). The A10-9700 uses the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Core i7-975 uses Bloomfield (2008−2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A10-9700 scores 3,555 against the Core i7-975's 3,527 — a 0.8% lead for the A10-9700. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A10-9700 vs 8 MB (total) on the Core i7-975.
| Feature | A10-9700 | Core i7-975 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 4 | 4 / 8 |
| Boost Clock | 3.8 GHz+6% | 3.6 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.5 GHz+5% | 3.33 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 8 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 2048 kB+700% | 256 kB (per core) |
| Process | 28 nm-38% | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) | Bloomfield (2008−2010) |
| PassMark | 3,555 | 3,527 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 642 | — |
Memory & Platform
The A10-9700 uses the AM4 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i7-975 uses LGA1366 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | A10-9700 | Core i7-975 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | AM4 | LGA1366 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+50% | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2400 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 64 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | No | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 8 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: AMD-V (A10-9700) / not specified (Core i7-975). The A10-9700 includes integrated graphics (Radeon R7), while the Core i7-975 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A10-9700 targets Budget. Direct competitor: A10-9700 rivals Pentium G4560.
| Feature | A10-9700 | Core i7-975 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | — |
| IGPU Model | Radeon R7 | — |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | — |
| Target Use | Budget | — |
Value Analysis
At launch, the A10-9700 was priced at $169, while the Core i7-975 came in at $999. On launch pricing ($169 vs $999), A10-9700 was $830 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the A10-9700 delivers 21.0 pts/$ vs 3.5 pts/$ for the Core i7-975 — making the A10-9700 the 142.5% better value option.
| Feature | A10-9700 | Core i7-975 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $169-83% | $999 |
| Performance per Dollar | 21.0+500% | 3.5 |
| Release Date | 2017 | 2009 |
Affiliate Disclosure
ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
















