A4-6320 vs Core i7-640LM

A4-6320 vs Core i7-640LM Performance Spectrum

A4-6320

2 / 2

1,532

+0.2%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i7-640LM

2 / 4

1,529

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.

A4-6320 vs Core i7-640LM 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.

A4-6320 vs Core i7-640LM: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A4-6320

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i7-640LM.

Trade-offs

❌160% higher power demand at 65W vs 25W.

Core i7-640LM

2010

Why buy it

✅Draws 25W instead of 65W, a 40W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than A4-6320 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (1,529 vs 1,532).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A4-6320.

Quick Answers

So, is A4-6320 better than Core i7-640LM?

Yes. A4-6320 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 3.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.2% 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, A4-6320 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.9% 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, A4-6320 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?

A4-6320 still makes the most sense overall. A4-6320 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

A4-6320 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 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.

A4-6320 vs Core i7-640LM Technical Specifications

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

A4-6320

The A4-6320 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 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L2 cache: 1024 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 1,532 points. Launch price was $50.

Core i7-640LM

The Core i7-640LM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 7 January 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.13 GHz, with boost up to 2.93 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1288. Thermal design power (TDP): 25 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800, DDR3-1066. Passmark benchmark score: 1,529 points. Launch price was $332.

⚡

Processing Power

The A4-6320 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i7-640LM's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 4 GHz on the A4-6320 versus 2.93 GHz on the Core i7-640LM — a 30.9% clock advantage for the A4-6320 (base: 3.8 GHz vs 2.13 GHz). The A4-6320 uses the Richland (2013−2014) architecture (32 nm), while the Core i7-640LM uses Arrandale (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the A4-6320 scores 1,532 against the Core i7-640LM's 1,529 — a 0.2% lead for the A4-6320.

Feature	A4-6320	Core i7-640LM
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	4 GHz+37%	2.93 GHz
Base Clock	3.8 GHz+78%	2.13 GHz
L3 Cache	—	4 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1024 kB+300%	256 kB (per core)
Process	32 nm	32 nm
Architecture	Richland (2013−2014)	Arrandale (2010−2011)
PassMark	1,532	1,529
Geekbench 6 Single	433	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-6320 uses the FM2 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i7-640LM uses BGA1288 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the A4-6320 versus 1066 on the Core i7-640LM — the A4-6320 supports 50.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A4-6320 supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: A55,A58,A68H,A75,A78,A88X (A4-6320) and HM55,HM57,QM57,QS57 (Core i7-640LM).

Feature	A4-6320	Core i7-640LM
Socket	FM2	BGA1288
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600+50%	1066
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB+300%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4-6320) vs true (Core i7-640LM). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 8370D (A4-6320) and Intel HD Graphics (Ironlake) (Core i7-640LM) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-6320 targets Budget Desktop. Direct competitor: A4-6320 rivals Pentium G3250; Core i7-640LM rivals Core 2 Duo SL9400.