A6-7400K vs Core i3-4010U

A6-7400K vs Core i3-4010U Performance Spectrum

A6-7400K

2 / 2

1,678

+1.1%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i3-4010U

2 / 4

1,660

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.

A6-7400K vs Core i3-4010U 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.

A6-7400K vs Core i3-4010U: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A6-7400K

2014

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 (true), unlike Core i3-4010U.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $101 MSRP, while Core i3-4010U mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Core i3-4010U

2013

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,660 vs 1,678).
❌687.7% higher power demand at 512W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A6-7400K.

Quick Answers

So, is A6-7400K better than Core i3-4010U?

Yes. A6-7400K is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.2% average FPS lead across 42 shared CPU game tests in our data, 1.1% 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, A6-7400K is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.2% more average FPS across 42 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A6-7400K is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

A6-7400K is the better buy right now. A6-7400K comes in at an unclear MSRP at $101 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.2% average FPS lead across 42 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (16.6 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

A6-7400K makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2013) 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.

A6-7400K vs Core i3-4010U Technical Specifications

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

A6-7400K

The A6-7400K is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Kaveri (2014−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L2 cache: 1024 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FM2+. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1866. Passmark benchmark score: 1,678 points. Launch price was $70.

Core i3-4010U

The Core i3-4010U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 June 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.7 GHz, with boost up to 1.7 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1168. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,660 points. Launch price was $281.

⚡

Processing Power

The A6-7400K packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i3-4010U's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 3.9 GHz on the A6-7400K versus 1.7 GHz on the Core i3-4010U — a 78.6% clock advantage for the A6-7400K (base: 3.5 GHz vs 1.7 GHz). The A6-7400K uses the Kaveri (2014−2015) architecture (28 nm), while the Core i3-4010U uses Haswell (2013−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the A6-7400K scores 1,678 against the Core i3-4010U's 1,660 — a 1.1% lead for the A6-7400K.

Feature	A6-7400K	Core i3-4010U
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	3.9 GHz+129%	1.7 GHz
Base Clock	3.5 GHz+106%	1.7 GHz
L3 Cache	—	3 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1024 kB+300%	256K (per core)
Process	28 nm	22 nm-21%
Architecture	Kaveri (2014−2015)	Haswell (2013−2015)
PassMark	1,678+1%	1,660

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A6-7400K uses the FM2+ socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i3-4010U uses FCBGA1168 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1866 on the A6-7400K versus DDR3L-1600 on the Core i3-4010U — the A6-7400K supports 16.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A6-7400K supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (A6-7400K) vs 12 (Core i3-4010U) — the A6-7400K offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A6-7400K	Core i3-4010U
Socket	FM2+	FCBGA1168
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	1866+17%	DDR3L-1600
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB+100%	16 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16+33%	12

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the A6-7400K has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: true (A6-7400K) vs VT-x, VT-d (Core i3-4010U). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon R5 Graphics (A6-7400K) and HD Graphics 4400 (Core i3-4010U) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-4010U targets Mobile. Direct competitor: A6-7400K rivals Pentium G3420.