Core i3-4110M vs Pro A12-8800B

Core i3-4110M vs Pro A12-8800B Performance Spectrum

Core i3-4110M

2 / 4

2,678

+0.4%

2,667

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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.

Core i3-4110M vs Pro A12-8800B 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.

Core i3-4110M vs Pro A12-8800B: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i3-4110M

2014

Why buy it

✅+0.4% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Pro A12-8800B across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌25500% higher power demand at 512W vs 2W.

Pro A12-8800B

2015

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 2W instead of 512W, a 510W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,667 vs 2,678).
❌Launch MSRP is still $400 MSRP, while Core i3-4110M mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Quick Answers

So, is Pro A12-8800B better than Core i3-4110M?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Pro A12-8800B is ahead with a 4.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-4110M pulls ahead with 0.4% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-4110M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Pro A12-8800B is the better buy right now. Pro A12-8800B comes in at an unclear MSRP at $400 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 4.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Core i3-4110M is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.4% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (6.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Pro A12-8800B makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2015 vs 2014). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i3-4110M vs Pro A12-8800B Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-4110M

The Core i3-4110M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 14 April 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA946. Thermal design power (TDP): 37 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,678 points. Launch price was $225.

Pro A12-8800B

The Pro A12-8800B is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 3 June 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Carrizo (2015−2018) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FP4. Thermal design power (TDP): 2 MB. Memory support: DDR3/DDR3L-2133. Passmark benchmark score: 2,667 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i3-4110M packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the Pro A12-8800B offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Pro A12-8800B has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Core i3-4110M versus 3.4 GHz on the Pro A12-8800B — a 26.7% clock advantage for the Pro A12-8800B (base: 2.6 GHz vs 2.1 GHz). The Core i3-4110M uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the Pro A12-8800B uses Carrizo (2015−2018) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-4110M scores 2,678 against the Pro A12-8800B's 2,667 — a 0.4% lead for the Core i3-4110M.

Feature	Core i3-4110M	Pro A12-8800B
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	2.6 GHz	3.4 GHz+31%
Base Clock	2.6 GHz+24%	2.1 GHz
L3 Cache	3 MB	—
L2 Cache	512 kB	2048 kB+300%
Process	22 nm-21%	28 nm
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Carrizo (2015−2018)
PassMark	2,678	2,667
Geekbench 6 Single	—	528
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	1,144

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-4110M uses the PGA946 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Pro A12-8800B uses FP4 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-1600 on the Core i3-4110M versus DDR3-2133 on the Pro A12-8800B — the Pro A12-8800B supports 33.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Pro A12-8800B 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.

Feature	Core i3-4110M	Pro A12-8800B
Socket	PGA946	FP4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1600	DDR3-2133+33%
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	64 GB+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i3-4110M) vs AMD-V (Pro A12-8800B). Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics 4600 (Core i3-4110M) and Radeon R7 Graphics (Pro A12-8800B) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-4110M targets Mobile.