A8-4500M vs Core i3-3120M

A8-4500M vs Core i3-3120M Performance Spectrum

A8-4500M

4 / 4

1,693

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i3-3120M

2 / 4

1,709

+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.

A8-4500M vs Core i3-3120M 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.

A8-4500M vs Core i3-3120M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A8-4500M

2012

Why buy it

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

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (283 vs 440).
❌Lower PassMark (1,693 vs 1,709).

Core i3-3120M

2012

Why buy it

✅+55.5% 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 i3-3120M better than A8-4500M?

Yes. Core i3-3120M is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.9% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i3-3120M is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.9% 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 i3-3120M 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 i3-3120M still makes the most sense overall. Core i3-3120M comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Core i3-3120M is the safer long-term CPU choice because it gives you more room to grow and a better platform outlook.

A8-4500M vs Core i3-3120M Technical Specifications

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

A8-4500M

The A8-4500M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.9 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 4 MB (total). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FS1r2. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: unknown. Passmark benchmark score: 1,693 points. Launch price was $90.

Core i3-3120M

The Core i3-3120M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 30 September 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,709 points. Launch price was $160.

⚡

Processing Power

The A8-4500M packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i3-3120M offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the A8-4500M has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the A8-4500M versus 2.5 GHz on the Core i3-3120M — a 11.3% clock advantage for the A8-4500M (base: 1.9 GHz vs 2.5 GHz). The A8-4500M uses the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Core i3-3120M uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the A8-4500M scores 1,693 against the Core i3-3120M's 1,709 — a 0.9% lead for the Core i3-3120M. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 283 vs 440, a 43.4% lead for the Core i3-3120M that directly translates to higher frame rates. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A8-4500M vs 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-3120M.

Feature	A8-4500M	Core i3-3120M
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.8 GHz+12%	2.5 GHz
Base Clock	1.9 GHz	2.5 GHz+32%
L3 Cache	0 kB	3 MB (total)
L2 Cache	4 MB (total)	256K (per core)+6300%
Process	32 nm	22 nm-31%
Architecture	Trinity (2012−2013)	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
PassMark	1,693	1,709
Geekbench 6 Single	283	440+55%
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	930

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A8-4500M uses the FS1r2 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i3-3120M uses PGA988 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1600 memory speed. The Core i3-3120M 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. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes.

Feature	A8-4500M	Core i3-3120M
Socket	FS1r2	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600	DDR3-1600
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	32 GB+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A8-4500M) vs VT-x, VT-d (Core i3-3120M). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 7640G (A8-4500M) and Intel HD Graphics 4000 (Core i3-3120M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A8-4500M targets Mainstream Laptop, Core i3-3120M targets Budget Laptop. Direct competitor: A8-4500M rivals Core i3-3110M; Core i3-3120M rivals AMD A8-4500M.

Feature	A8-4500M	Core i3-3120M
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	Radeon HD 7640G	Intel HD Graphics 4000
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	AMD-V	VT-x, VT-d
Target Use	Mainstream Laptop	Budget Laptop