A4-4355M vs Core i7-2617M

A4-4355M vs Core i7-2617M Performance Spectrum

A4-4355M

2 / 2

1,690

+0.2%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i7-2617M

2 / 4

1,687

0.0%

Pentium Dual-Core E2180

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.

A4-4355M vs Core i7-2617M 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.

A4-4355M vs Core i7-2617M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A4-4355M

2012

Why buy it

✅+0.2% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (239 vs 448).

Core i7-2617M

2011

Why buy it

✅+87.4% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,687 vs 1,690).

Quick Answers

So, is A4-4355M better than Core i7-2617M?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core i7-2617M is ahead with a 1.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, A4-4355M pulls ahead with 0.2% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A4-4355M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

A4-4355M still makes the most sense overall. A4-4355M comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.2% better PassMark.

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

A4-4355M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 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.

A4-4355M vs Core i7-2617M Technical Specifications

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

A4-4355M

The A4-4355M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.9 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (total). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FP2. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: unknown Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 1,690 points. Launch price was $50.

Core i7-2617M

The Core i7-2617M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 January 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333. Passmark benchmark score: 1,687 points. Launch price was $100.

⚡

Processing Power

The A4-4355M packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i7-2617M's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the A4-4355M versus 2.6 GHz on the Core i7-2617M — a 8% clock advantage for the Core i7-2617M (base: 1.9 GHz vs 1.5 GHz). The A4-4355M uses the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Core i7-2617M uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the A4-4355M scores 1,690 against the Core i7-2617M's 1,687 — a 0.2% lead for the A4-4355M. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 239 vs 448, a 60.8% lead for the Core i7-2617M that directly translates to higher frame rates. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A4-4355M vs 4 MB on the Core i7-2617M.

Feature	A4-4355M	Core i7-2617M
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.4 GHz	2.6 GHz+8%
Base Clock	1.9 GHz+27%	1.5 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	4 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB (total)+100%	512 kB
Process	32 nm	32 nm
Architecture	Trinity (2012−2013)	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark	1,690	1,687
Geekbench 6 Single	239	448+87%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-4355M uses the FP2 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i7-2617M uses BGA1023 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1333 memory speed. The A4-4355M 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	A4-4355M	Core i7-2617M
Socket	FP2	BGA1023
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	DDR3-1333
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 (A4-4355M) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i7-2617M). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 7400G (A4-4355M) and HD Graphics 3000 (Core i7-2617M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-4355M targets Ultrathin Laptop, Core i7-2617M targets Ultrabook. Direct competitor: A4-4355M rivals Pentium 2117U; Core i7-2617M rivals A6-3400M.

Feature	A4-4355M	Core i7-2617M
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	Radeon HD 7400G	HD Graphics 3000
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	AMD-V	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	Ultrathin Laptop	Ultrabook