A6-3400M vs Core i3-2328M

A6-3400M vs Core i3-2328M Performance Spectrum

A6-3400M

4 / 4

1,223

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i3-2328M

2 / 4

1,234

+0.9%

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 i3-2328M 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 i3-2328M: 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

✅Draws 35W instead of 512W, a 477W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (218 vs 329).
❌Lower PassMark (1,223 vs 1,234).

Core i3-2328M

2012

Why buy it

✅+50.9% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.

Trade-offs

❌1362.9% higher power demand at 512W vs 35W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-2328M better than A6-3400M?

Yes. Core i3-2328M is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.9% 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, Core i3-2328M is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.5% 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, Core i3-2328M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.9% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core i3-2328M still makes the most sense overall. Core i3-2328M comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Core i3-2328M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2011) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 4 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A6-3400M vs Core i3-2328M 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 i3-2328M

The Core i3-2328M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 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: 1,234 points. Launch price was $225.

⚡

Processing Power

The A6-3400M packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i3-2328M offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the A6-3400M has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.3 GHz on the A6-3400M versus 2.2 GHz on the Core i3-2328M — a 4.4% clock advantage for the A6-3400M (base: 1.4 GHz vs 2.2 GHz). The A6-3400M uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Core i3-2328M uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the A6-3400M scores 1,223 against the Core i3-2328M's 1,234 — a 0.9% lead for the Core i3-2328M. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 218 vs 329, a 40.6% lead for the Core i3-2328M that directly translates to higher frame rates. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A6-3400M vs 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-2328M.

Feature	A6-3400M	Core i3-2328M
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.3 GHz+5%	2.2 GHz
Base Clock	1.4 GHz	2.2 GHz+57%
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	1,234
Geekbench 6 Single	218	329+51%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A6-3400M uses the FS1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i3-2328M uses PGA988 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1333 memory speed. The Core i3-2328M 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 i3-2328M
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, EPT (Core i3-2328M). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 6520G (A6-3400M) and HD Graphics 3000 (Core i3-2328M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A6-3400M targets Budget Laptop, Core i3-2328M targets Budget Laptop. Direct competitor: A6-3400M rivals Core i3-2310M; Core i3-2328M rivals Pentium B980.