A4-3305M vs Core i7-820QM

A4-3305M vs Core i7-820QM Performance Spectrum

A4-3305M

2 / 2

1,812

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i7-820QM

4 / 8

1,819

+0.4%

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.

A4-3305M vs Core i7-820QM 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.

A4-3305M vs Core i7-820QM: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A4-3305M

2011

Why buy it

✅Draws 35W instead of 45W, a 10W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 6480G, while Core i7-820QM needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,812 vs 1,819).

Core i7-820QM

2009

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $546 MSRP, while A4-3305M mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌28.6% higher power demand at 45W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while A4-3305M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-820QM better than A4-3305M?

Yes. Core i7-820QM is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.4% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i7-820QM is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.8% 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, Core i7-820QM is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads.

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

Core i7-820QM is the better buy right now. Core i7-820QM comes in at an unclear MSRP at $546 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (3.3 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

A4-3305M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2009). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A4-3305M vs Core i7-820QM Technical Specifications

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

A4-3305M

The A4-3305M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Llano (2011−2012) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.9 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FS1. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,812 points. Launch price was $50.

Core i7-820QM

The Core i7-820QM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 23 September 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Clarksfield (2009−2010) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 1.73 GHz, with boost up to 3.06 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333. Passmark benchmark score: 1,819 points. Launch price was $546.

⚡

Processing Power

The A4-3305M packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Core i7-820QM offers 4 cores / 8 threads — the Core i7-820QM has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the A4-3305M versus 3.06 GHz on the Core i7-820QM — a 20.1% clock advantage for the Core i7-820QM (base: 1.9 GHz vs 1.73 GHz). The A4-3305M uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Core i7-820QM uses Clarksfield (2009−2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A4-3305M scores 1,812 against the Core i7-820QM's 1,819 — a 0.4% lead for the Core i7-820QM. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A4-3305M vs 8 MB (total) on the Core i7-820QM.

Feature	A4-3305M	Core i7-820QM
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 8+100%
Boost Clock	2.5 GHz	3.06 GHz+22%
Base Clock	1.9 GHz+10%	1.73 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	8 MB (total)
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+100%	256 kB (per core)
Process	32 nm-29%	45 nm
Architecture	Llano (2011−2012)	Clarksfield (2009−2010)
PassMark	1,812	1,819
Geekbench 6 Single	276	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-3305M uses the FS1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i7-820QM uses PGA988 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1333 memory speed. The A4-3305M supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes.

Feature	A4-3305M	Core i7-820QM
Socket	FS1	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	1333
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+100%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4-3305M) vs true (Core i7-820QM). The A4-3305M includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 6480G), while the Core i7-820QM requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-3305M targets Budget Laptop. Direct competitor: A4-3305M rivals Pentium B950; Core i7-820QM rivals Core 2 Quad Q9000.