A4-5100 vs Core i3-330UM

A4-5100 vs Core i3-330UM Performance Spectrum

A4-5100

4 / 4

1,301

+0.3%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i3-330UM

2 / 4

1,297

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.

A4-5100 vs Core i3-330UM 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.

A4-5100 vs Core i3-330UM: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A4-5100

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.4% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 15W instead of 512W, a 497W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Core i3-330UM

2010

Why buy it

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

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than A4-5100 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (1,297 vs 1,301).
❌3313.3% higher power demand at 512W vs 15W.

Quick Answers

So, is A4-5100 better than Core i3-330UM?

Yes. A4-5100 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 5.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.3% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, A4-5100 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 5.4% 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, A4-5100 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

A4-5100 still makes the most sense overall. A4-5100 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 5.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

A4-5100 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2010) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A4-5100 vs Core i3-330UM Technical Specifications

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

A4-5100

The A4-5100 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: 1.55 GHz. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,301 points. Launch price was $50.

Core i3-330UM

The Core i3-330UM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 May 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.2 GHz, with boost up to 0.1 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1288. Thermal design power (TDP): 18 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,297 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The A4-5100 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i3-330UM offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the A4-5100 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.55 GHz on the A4-5100 versus 0.1 GHz on the Core i3-330UM — a 175.8% clock advantage for the A4-5100. The A4-5100 uses the Kabini (2013−2014) architecture (28 nm), while the Core i3-330UM uses Arrandale (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the A4-5100 scores 1,301 against the Core i3-330UM's 1,297 — a 0.3% lead for the A4-5100. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 165 vs 300, a 58.1% lead for the Core i3-330UM that directly translates to higher frame rates.

Feature	A4-5100	Core i3-330UM
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	1.55 GHz+1450%	0.1 GHz
Base Clock	—	1.2 GHz
L3 Cache	—	3 MB
L2 Cache	2048 kB+300%	512 kB
Process	28 nm-13%	32 nm
Architecture	Kabini (2013−2014)	Arrandale (2010−2011)
PassMark	1,301	1,297
Geekbench 6 Single	165	300+82%
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	600

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-5100 uses the FT3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i3-330UM uses BGA1288 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-1600 on the A4-5100 versus DDR3-800 on the Core i3-330UM — the A4-5100 supports 100% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A4-5100 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (A4-5100) vs 2 (Core i3-330UM). PCIe lanes: 8 (A4-5100) vs 16 (Core i3-330UM) — the Core i3-330UM offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A4-5100	Core i3-330UM
Socket	FT3	BGA1288
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1600+100%	DDR3-800
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 (A4-5100) vs VT-x, VT-d (Core i3-330UM). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 8330 (A4-5100) and Intel HD Graphics (Core i3-330UM) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-5100 targets Entry Laptop, Core i3-330UM targets Legacy Laptop. Direct competitor: A4-5100 rivals Pentium N3540; Core i3-330UM rivals Pentium SU7300.