A4-5000 vs Core i3-390M

A4-5000 vs Core i3-390M Performance Spectrum

A4-5000

4 / 4

1,284

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i3-390M

2 / 4

1,292

+0.6%

Atom D2550

Pentium T3400

Pentium E5400

Pentium Dual Core T4200

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.

A4-5000 vs Core i3-390M 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.

A4-5000 vs Core i3-390M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A4-5000

2013

Why buy it

✅Draws 15W instead of 512W, a 497W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,284 vs 1,292).

Core i3-390M

2011

Why buy it

✅+0.6% higher PassMark.
✅100% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌3313.3% higher power demand at 512W vs 15W.

Quick Answers

So, is A4-5000 better than Core i3-390M?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A4-5000 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, Core i3-390M pulls ahead with 0.6% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-390M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

A4-5000 still makes the most sense overall. A4-5000 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

A4-5000 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A4-5000 vs Core i3-390M Technical Specifications

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

A4-5000

The A4-5000 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Kabini (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Max frequency: 1.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,284 points. Launch price was $50.

Core i3-390M

The Core i3-390M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 9 January 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.66 GHz, with boost up to 0.67 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,292 points. Launch price was $39.

⚡

Processing Power

The A4-5000 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i3-390M offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the A4-5000 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.5 GHz on the A4-5000 versus 0.67 GHz on the Core i3-390M — a 76.5% clock advantage for the A4-5000. The A4-5000 uses the Kabini (2013−2014) architecture (28 nm), while the Core i3-390M uses Arrandale (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the A4-5000 scores 1,284 against the Core i3-390M's 1,292 — a 0.6% lead for the Core i3-390M. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A4-5000 vs 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-390M.

Feature	A4-5000	Core i3-390M
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	1.5 GHz+124%	0.67 GHz
Base Clock	—	2.66 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	3 MB (total)
L2 Cache	2048 kB+700%	256K (per core)
Process	28 nm-13%	32 nm
Architecture	Kabini (2013−2014)	Arrandale (2010−2011)
PassMark	1,284	1,292
Geekbench 6 Single	158	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-5000 uses the FT3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i3-390M uses PGA988 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-1600 on the A4-5000 versus DDR3-1066 on the Core i3-390M — the A4-5000 supports 50.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A4-5000 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (A4-5000) vs 2 (Core i3-390M). PCIe lanes: 8 (A4-5000) vs 16 (Core i3-390M) — the Core i3-390M offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A4-5000	Core i3-390M
Socket	FT3	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1600+50%	DDR3-1066
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+100%	8 GB
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	8	16+100%

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4-5000) vs VT-x (Core i3-390M). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 8330 (A4-5000) and HD Graphics (Core i3-390M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-5000 targets Entry Laptop, Core i3-390M targets Mobile. Direct competitor: A4-5000 rivals Pentium N3520.