A6-3500 vs Core i3-4020Y

A6-3500 vs Core i3-4020Y Performance Spectrum

A6-3500

3 / 3

1,439

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i3-4020Y

2 / 4

1,448

+0.6%

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.

A6-3500 vs Core i3-4020Y 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.

A6-3500 vs Core i3-4020Y: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A6-3500

2011

Why buy it

✅Draws 65W instead of 512W, a 447W reduction.
✅33.3% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 12) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i3-4020Y.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,439 vs 1,448).

Core i3-4020Y

2013

Why buy it

✅+0.6% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌687.7% higher power demand at 512W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A6-3500.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-4020Y better than A6-3500?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A6-3500 is ahead with a 2.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-4020Y pulls ahead with 0.6% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-4020Y is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core i3-4020Y still makes the most sense overall. Core i3-4020Y comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.6% better PassMark.

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

Core i3-4020Y makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2011) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 4 threads instead of 3/3. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A6-3500 vs Core i3-4020Y Technical Specifications

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

A6-3500

The A6-3500 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Llano (2011−2012) architecture. It features 3 cores and 3 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM1. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,439 points. Launch price was $70.

Core i3-4020Y

The Core i3-4020Y is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 1.5 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1168. Thermal design power (TDP): 11.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,448 points. Launch price was $304.

⚡

Processing Power

The A6-3500 packs 3 cores / 3 threads, while the Core i3-4020Y offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the A6-3500 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the A6-3500 versus 1.5 GHz on the Core i3-4020Y — a 46.2% clock advantage for the A6-3500 (base: 2.1 GHz vs 1.5 GHz). The A6-3500 uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Core i3-4020Y uses Haswell (2013−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the A6-3500 scores 1,439 against the Core i3-4020Y's 1,448 — a 0.6% lead for the Core i3-4020Y. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A6-3500 vs 3 MB on the Core i3-4020Y.

Feature	A6-3500	Core i3-4020Y
Cores / Threads	3 / 3+50%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.4 GHz+60%	1.5 GHz
Base Clock	2.1 GHz+40%	1.5 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	3 MB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)+100%	512 kB
Process	32 nm	22 nm-31%
Architecture	Llano (2011−2012)	Haswell (2013−2015)
PassMark	1,439	1,448
Geekbench 6 Single	265	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A6-3500 uses the FM1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i3-4020Y uses FCBGA1168 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1866 on the A6-3500 versus 1600 on the Core i3-4020Y — the A6-3500 supports 16.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 16 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (A6-3500) vs 12 (Core i3-4020Y) — the A6-3500 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: A55,A75 (A6-3500) and BGA1168 (Core i3-4020Y).

Feature	A6-3500	Core i3-4020Y
Socket	FM1	FCBGA1168
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1866+17%	1600
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	16 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16+33%	12

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization support: AMD-V (A6-3500) vs true (Core i3-4020Y). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 6530D (A6-3500) and Intel HD Graphics 4200 (Core i3-4020Y) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A6-3500 targets Budget Desktop. Direct competitor: A6-3500 rivals Pentium G620.