A4-4000 vs Core i5-2537M

A4-4000 vs Core i5-2537M Performance Spectrum

A4-4000

2 / 2

1,152

+0.7%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i5-2537M

2 / 4

1,144

0.0%

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.

A4-4000 vs Core i5-2537M 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.

A4-4000 vs Core i5-2537M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A4-4000

2013

Why buy it

✅+0.7% higher PassMark.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i5-2537M.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (348 vs 427).
❌282.4% higher power demand at 65W vs 17W.

Core i5-2537M

2011

Why buy it

✅+22.7% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅Draws 17W instead of 65W, a 48W reduction.
✅100% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,144 vs 1,152).
❌Launch MSRP is still $250 MSRP, while A4-4000 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A4-4000.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i5-2537M better than A4-4000?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core i5-2537M is ahead with a 2.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, A4-4000 pulls ahead with 0.7% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A4-4000 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Core i5-2537M is the better buy right now. Core i5-2537M comes in at an unclear MSRP at $250 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that A4-4000 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.7% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (4.6 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

A4-4000 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2011) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A4-4000 vs Core i5-2537M Technical Specifications

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

A4-4000

The A4-4000 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Richland (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,152 points. Launch price was $50.

Core i5-2537M

The Core i5-2537M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 February 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.3 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,144 points. Launch price was $250.

⚡

Processing Power

The A4-4000 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i5-2537M's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 3.2 GHz on the A4-4000 versus 2.3 GHz on the Core i5-2537M — a 32.7% clock advantage for the A4-4000 (base: 3 GHz vs 1.4 GHz). The A4-4000 uses the Richland (2013−2014) architecture (32 nm), while the Core i5-2537M uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the A4-4000 scores 1,152 against the Core i5-2537M's 1,144 — a 0.7% lead for the A4-4000. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 348 vs 427, a 20.4% lead for the Core i5-2537M that directly translates to higher frame rates. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A4-4000 vs 3 MB (total) on the Core i5-2537M.

Feature	A4-4000	Core i5-2537M
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	3.2 GHz+39%	2.3 GHz
Base Clock	3 GHz+114%	1.4 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	3 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	256K (per core)+25500%
Process	32 nm	32 nm
Architecture	Richland (2013−2014)	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark	1,152	1,144
Geekbench 6 Single	348	427+23%
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	717

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-4000 uses the FM2 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i5-2537M uses BGA1023 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1333 memory speed. The A4-4000 supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 8 (A4-4000) vs 16 (Core i5-2537M) — the Core i5-2537M offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: A55,A75,A85X,A88X (A4-4000) and HM65,HM67,QM67,QS57,QS67,UM67 (Core i5-2537M).

Feature	A4-4000	Core i5-2537M
Socket	FM2	BGA1023
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	1333
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB+100%	16 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	8	16+100%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4-4000) vs true (Core i5-2537M). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 7480D (A4-4000) and Intel HD Graphics 3000 (Core i5-2537M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-4000 targets Budget Desktop. Direct competitor: A4-4000 rivals Celeron G1610; Core i5-2537M rivals Core i5-2410M.