A6-5400K vs Core i3-390M

A6-5400K vs Core i3-390M Performance Spectrum

A6-5400K

2 / 2

1,279

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i3-390M

2 / 4

1,292

+1.0%

Atom D2550

Pentium T3400

Pentium E5400

Pentium Dual Core T4200

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.

A6-5400K vs Core i3-390M 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.

A6-5400K vs Core i3-390M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A6-5400K

2012

Why buy it

✅Draws 65W instead of 512W, a 447W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i3-390M.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,279 vs 1,292).

Core i3-390M

2011

Why buy it

✅+1% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌687.7% higher power demand at 512W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A6-5400K.

Quick Answers

So, is A6-5400K better than Core i3-390M?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A6-5400K is ahead with a 2.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-390M pulls ahead with 1% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-390M is the stronger fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

A6-5400K still makes the most sense overall. A6-5400K comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

A6-5400K makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A6-5400K vs Core i3-390M Technical Specifications

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

A6-5400K

The A6-5400K is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,279 points. Launch price was $70.

Core i3-390M

The Core i3-390M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 9 January 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.66 GHz, with boost up to 0.67 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: 1,292 points. Launch price was $39.

⚡

Processing Power

The A6-5400K packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i3-390M's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 3.8 GHz on the A6-5400K versus 0.67 GHz on the Core i3-390M — a 140% clock advantage for the A6-5400K (base: 3.6 GHz vs 2.66 GHz). The A6-5400K uses the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Core i3-390M uses Arrandale (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the A6-5400K scores 1,279 against the Core i3-390M's 1,292 — a 1% lead for the Core i3-390M. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A6-5400K vs 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-390M.

Feature	A6-5400K	Core i3-390M
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	3.8 GHz+467%	0.67 GHz
Base Clock	3.6 GHz+35%	2.66 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	3 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	256K (per core)+25500%
Process	32 nm	32 nm
Architecture	Trinity (2012−2013)	Arrandale (2010−2011)
PassMark	1,279	1,292+1%
Geekbench 6 Single	390	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A6-5400K uses the FM2 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i3-390M uses PGA988 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1866 on the A6-5400K versus DDR3-1066 on the Core i3-390M — the A6-5400K supports 75% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A6-5400K 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.

Feature	A6-5400K	Core i3-390M
Socket	FM2	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1866+75%	DDR3-1066
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB+300%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the A6-5400K has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A6-5400K) vs VT-x (Core i3-390M). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 7540D (A6-5400K) and HD Graphics (Core i3-390M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A6-5400K targets Budget Desktop, Core i3-390M targets Mobile. Direct competitor: A6-5400K rivals Pentium G2120.