A8-5500 vs Core i7-3687U

A8-5500 vs Core i7-3687U Performance Spectrum

A8-5500

4 / 4

2,615

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i7-3687U

2 / 4

2,621

+0.2%

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.

A8-5500 vs Core i7-3687U 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.

A8-5500 vs Core i7-3687U: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A8-5500

2012

Why buy it

✅Draws 65W instead of 512W, a 447W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (true), unlike Core i7-3687U.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,615 vs 2,621).

Core i7-3687U

2013

Why buy it

✅+0.2% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌687.7% higher power demand at 512W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A8-5500.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-3687U better than A8-5500?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A8-5500 is ahead with a 1.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i7-3687U pulls ahead with 0.2% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i7-3687U is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core i7-3687U still makes the most sense overall. Core i7-3687U comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.2% better PassMark.

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

Core i7-3687U makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2012) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 4 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A8-5500 vs Core i7-3687U Technical Specifications

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

A8-5500

The A8-5500 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 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.7 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: 2,615 points. Launch price was $90.

Core i7-3687U

The Core i7-3687U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 January 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.3 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,621 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The A8-5500 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i7-3687U offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the A8-5500 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.7 GHz on the A8-5500 versus 3.3 GHz on the Core i7-3687U — a 11.4% clock advantage for the A8-5500 (base: 3.2 GHz vs 2.1 GHz). The A8-5500 uses the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Core i7-3687U uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the A8-5500 scores 2,615 against the Core i7-3687U's 2,621 — a 0.2% lead for the Core i7-3687U. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A8-5500 vs 4 MB (total) on the Core i7-3687U.

Feature	A8-5500	Core i7-3687U
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	3.7 GHz+12%	3.3 GHz
Base Clock	3.2 GHz+52%	2.1 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	4 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	256K (per core)+25500%
Process	32 nm	22 nm-31%
Architecture	Trinity (2012−2013)	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
PassMark	2,615	2,621
Geekbench 6 Single	—	640
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	1,240

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A8-5500 uses the FM2 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i7-3687U uses BGA1023 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1866 on the A8-5500 versus DDR3L-1600 on the Core i7-3687U — the A8-5500 supports 16.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A8-5500 supports up to 64 GB of RAM compared to 32 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: FM2 (A8-5500) and QM77,QS77 (Core i7-3687U).

Feature	A8-5500	Core i7-3687U
Socket	FM2	BGA1023
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	1866+17%	DDR3L-1600
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB+100%	32 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (A8-5500) vs VT-x, VT-d (Core i7-3687U). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 7560D (A8-5500) and HD Graphics 4000 (Core i7-3687U) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-3687U targets Enthusiast. Direct competitor: A8-5500 rivals Pentium G2120; Core i7-3687U rivals Ryzen 7 3700U.