A4-9120 vs Core i3-380M

A4-9120 vs Core i3-380M Performance Spectrum

A4-9120

2 / 2

1,222

+0.8%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i3-380M

2 / 4

1,212

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.

A4-9120 vs Core i3-380M 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.

A4-9120 vs Core i3-380M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A4-9120

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +5.4% higher average FPS across 41 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 1W instead of 35W, a 34W reduction.

Trade-offs

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

Core i3-380M

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 A4-9120 across 41 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (1,212 vs 1,222).
❌Launch MSRP is still $49 MSRP, while A4-9120 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌3400% higher power demand at 35W vs 1W.

Quick Answers

So, is A4-9120 better than Core i3-380M?

Yes. A4-9120 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 5.4% average FPS lead across 41 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.8% 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, A4-9120 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 5.4% more average FPS across 41 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A4-9120 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.8% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

A4-9120 is still the much better call for a fresh build. A4-9120 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $49 MSRP, and it still gives you a 5.4% average FPS lead across 41 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i3-380M only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2010 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (24.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on PGA988.

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

A4-9120 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 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.

A4-9120 vs Core i3-380M Technical Specifications

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

A4-9120

The A4-9120 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: BGA. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,222 points. Launch price was $50.

Core i3-380M

The Core i3-380M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 26 October 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.53 GHz, with boost up to 0.53 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: 1,212 points. Launch price was $49.

⚡

Processing Power

The A4-9120 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i3-380M's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the A4-9120 versus 0.53 GHz on the Core i3-380M — a 130% clock advantage for the A4-9120 (base: 2.2 GHz vs 2.53 GHz). The A4-9120 uses the Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Core i3-380M uses Arrandale (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the A4-9120 scores 1,222 against the Core i3-380M's 1,212 — a 0.8% lead for the A4-9120. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 350 vs 450, a 25% lead for the Core i3-380M that directly translates to higher frame rates.

Feature	A4-9120	Core i3-380M
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.5 GHz+372%	0.53 GHz
Base Clock	2.2 GHz	2.53 GHz+15%
L3 Cache	—	3 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB	256K (per core)+25500%
Process	28 nm-13%	32 nm
Architecture	Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)	Arrandale (2010−2011)
PassMark	1,222	1,212
Geekbench 6 Single	350	450+29%
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	1,100

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-9120 uses the BGA socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i3-380M uses PGA988 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2133 on the A4-9120 versus DDR3-1066 on the Core i3-380M — the A4-9120 supports 100.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 8 GB of RAM. Memory channels: 1 (A4-9120) vs 2 (Core i3-380M). PCIe lanes: 8 (A4-9120) vs 16 (Core i3-380M) — the Core i3-380M offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A4-9120	Core i3-380M
Socket	BGA	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2133+100%	DDR3-1066
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	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 (A4-9120) vs VT-x (Core i3-380M). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon R3 (A4-9120) and Intel HD Graphics (Gen 1) (Core i3-380M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-9120 targets Entry Laptop, Core i3-380M targets Legacy Laptop. Direct competitor: A4-9120 rivals Celeron N3350; Core i3-380M rivals AMD Athlon II P320.