A6-3400M vs Core i3-2310M

A6-3400M vs Core i3-2310M Performance Spectrum

A6-3400M

4 / 4

1,223

+0.1%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i3-2310M

2 / 4

1,222

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.

A6-3400M vs Core i3-2310M 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.

A6-3400M vs Core i3-2310M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A6-3400M

2011

Why buy it

✅+0.1% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 35W instead of 512W, a 477W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (218 vs 350).

Core i3-2310M

2011

Why buy it

✅+60.6% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,222 vs 1,223).
❌1362.9% higher power demand at 512W vs 35W.

Quick Answers

So, is A6-3400M better than Core i3-2310M?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core i3-2310M is ahead with a 1.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, A6-3400M pulls ahead with 0.1% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A6-3400M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

A6-3400M still makes the most sense overall. A6-3400M comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.1% better PassMark.

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

A6-3400M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting 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.

A6-3400M vs Core i3-2310M Technical Specifications

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

A6-3400M

The A6-3400M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Llano (2011−2012) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.3 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FS1. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,223 points. Launch price was $70.

Core i3-2310M

The Core i3-2310M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 February 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 2.1 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: 1,222 points. Launch price was $225.

⚡

Processing Power

The A6-3400M packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i3-2310M offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the A6-3400M has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.3 GHz on the A6-3400M versus 2.1 GHz on the Core i3-2310M — a 9.1% clock advantage for the A6-3400M (base: 1.4 GHz vs 2.1 GHz). The A6-3400M uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Core i3-2310M uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the A6-3400M scores 1,223 against the Core i3-2310M's 1,222 — a 0.1% lead for the A6-3400M. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 218 vs 350, a 46.5% lead for the Core i3-2310M that directly translates to higher frame rates. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A6-3400M vs 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-2310M.

Feature	A6-3400M	Core i3-2310M
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.3 GHz+10%	2.1 GHz
Base Clock	1.4 GHz	2.1 GHz+50%
L3 Cache	0 kB	3 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	256K (per core)+25500%
Process	32 nm	32 nm
Architecture	Llano (2011−2012)	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark	1,223	1,222
Geekbench 6 Single	218	350+61%
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	658

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A6-3400M uses the FS1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i3-2310M uses PGA988 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1333 memory speed. The Core i3-2310M 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	A6-3400M	Core i3-2310M
Socket	FS1	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	16 GB+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A6-3400M) vs VT-x (Core i3-2310M). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 6520G (A6-3400M) and HD Graphics 3000 (Core i3-2310M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A6-3400M targets Budget Laptop, Core i3-2310M targets Budget. Direct competitor: A6-3400M rivals Core i3-2310M; Core i3-2310M rivals Athlon Silver 3050U.