Core i3-4160T vs PRO A10-8750B

Core i3-4160T vs PRO A10-8750B Performance Spectrum

Core i3-4160T

2 / 4

3,087

+0.9%

Core i5-520M

Core i3-2130

Pentium G4500T

Celeron Dual-Core T1400

3,058

0.0%

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 i3-4160T vs PRO A10-8750B 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 i3-4160T vs PRO A10-8750B: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i3-4160T

2014

Why buy it

✅+0.9% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 35W instead of 95W, a 60W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 4400, while PRO A10-8750B needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike PRO A10-8750B.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than PRO A10-8750B across 46 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Launch MSRP is still $117 MSRP, while PRO A10-8750B mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

PRO A10-8750B

2015

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.3% higher average FPS across 46 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,058 vs 3,087).
❌171.4% higher power demand at 95W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-4160T can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Core i3-4160T.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-4160T better than PRO A10-8750B?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, PRO A10-8750B is ahead with a 3.3% average FPS lead across 46 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-4160T pulls ahead with 0.9% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-4160T 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 i3-4160T is the better buy right now. Core i3-4160T comes in at an unclear MSRP at $117 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.9% better PassMark. The compromise is that PRO A10-8750B is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 3.3% average FPS lead across 46 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (26.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 A10-8750B 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 i3-4160T vs PRO A10-8750B Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-4160T

The Core i3-4160T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 21 July 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.1 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1150. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,087 points. Launch price was $142.

PRO A10-8750B

The PRO A10-8750B is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 29 September 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Godaveri (2014−2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FM2+. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-2133. Passmark benchmark score: 3,058 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i3-4160T packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the PRO A10-8750B offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the PRO A10-8750B has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.1 GHz on the Core i3-4160T versus 4 GHz on the PRO A10-8750B — a 25.4% clock advantage for the PRO A10-8750B (base: 3.1 GHz vs 3.6 GHz). The Core i3-4160T uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the PRO A10-8750B uses Godaveri (2014−2016) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-4160T scores 3,087 against the PRO A10-8750B's 3,058 — a 0.9% lead for the Core i3-4160T.

Feature	Core i3-4160T	PRO A10-8750B
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	3.1 GHz	4 GHz+29%
Base Clock	3.1 GHz	3.6 GHz+16%
L3 Cache	3 MB (total)	—
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	4096 kB+1500%
Process	22 nm-21%	28 nm
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Godaveri (2014−2016)
PassMark	3,087	3,058
Geekbench 6 Single	900	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-4160T uses the LGA1150 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the PRO A10-8750B uses FM2+ (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i3-4160T	PRO A10-8750B
Socket	LGA1150	FM2+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	Yes	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, EPT (Core i3-4160T) / not specified (PRO A10-8750B). The Core i3-4160T includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 4400), while the PRO A10-8750B requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-4160T targets Low Power Desktop. Direct competitor: Core i3-4160T rivals A10-7800.