A6-9500E vs Core i5-520M

A6-9500E vs Core i5-520M Performance Spectrum

A6-9500E

2 / 2

1,741

+0.8%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i5-520M

2 / 4

1,727

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.

A6-9500E vs Core i5-520M 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.

A6-9500E vs Core i5-520M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A6-9500E

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.6% higher average FPS across 12 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Core i5-520M

2010

Why buy it

✅100% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than A6-9500E across 12 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (1,727 vs 1,741).
❌Launch MSRP is still $225 MSRP, while A6-9500E mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Quick Answers

So, is A6-9500E better than Core i5-520M?

Yes. A6-9500E is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 3.6% average FPS lead across 12 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.8% 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, A6-9500E is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.6% more average FPS across 12 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A6-9500E is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.8% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

A6-9500E is still the much better call for a fresh build. A6-9500E comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $225 MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.6% average FPS lead across 12 shared CPU game tests in our data. Core i5-520M only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2010 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (7.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on PGA988.

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

A6-9500E makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2010) 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.

A6-9500E vs Core i5-520M Technical Specifications

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

A6-9500E

The A6-9500E is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1024 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 1,741 points. Launch price was $70.

Core i5-520M

The Core i5-520M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 7 January 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.93 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800, DDR3-1066. Passmark benchmark score: 1,727 points. Launch price was $225.

⚡

Processing Power

The A6-9500E packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i5-520M's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 3.4 GHz on the A6-9500E versus 2.93 GHz on the Core i5-520M — a 14.8% clock advantage for the A6-9500E (base: 3 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The A6-9500E uses the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Core i5-520M uses Arrandale (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the A6-9500E scores 1,741 against the Core i5-520M's 1,727 — a 0.8% lead for the A6-9500E. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A6-9500E vs 3 MB on the Core i5-520M.

Feature	A6-9500E	Core i5-520M
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	3.4 GHz+16%	2.93 GHz
Base Clock	3 GHz+25%	2.4 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	3 MB
L2 Cache	1024 kB+100%	512 kB
Process	28 nm-13%	32 nm
Architecture	Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)	Arrandale (2010−2011)
PassMark	1,741	1,727
Geekbench 6 Single	—	360
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	695

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A6-9500E uses the AM4 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i5-520M uses PGA988 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2400 on the A6-9500E versus 1066 on the Core i5-520M — the A6-9500E supports 125.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A6-9500E 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. PCIe lanes: 8 (A6-9500E) vs 16 (Core i5-520M) — the Core i5-520M offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD AM4 (A6-9500E) and HM55,HM57,QM57 (Core i5-520M).

Feature	A6-9500E	Core i5-520M
Socket	AM4	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2400+125%	1066
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB+300%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	8	16+100%

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (A6-9500E) / true (Core i5-520M). Both include integrated graphics — AMD Radeon R5 (A6-9500E) and Intel HD Graphics (Ironlake) (Core i5-520M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Core i5-520M rivals AMD Turion II Ultra M660.