Core i3-7167U vs PRO A8-9600

Core i3-7167U vs PRO A8-9600 Performance Spectrum

Core i3-7167U

2 / 4

3,368

+1.5%

3,318

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 i3-7167U vs PRO A8-9600 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 i3-7167U vs PRO A8-9600: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i3-7167U

2017

Why buy it

✅+1.5% higher PassMark.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (12 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Iris Plus Graphics 650, while PRO A8-9600 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than PRO A8-9600 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌687.7% higher power demand at 512W vs 65W.

PRO A8-9600

2016

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +4.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 65W instead of 512W, a 447W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,318 vs 3,368).
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-7167U can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-7167U better than PRO A8-9600?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, PRO A8-9600 is ahead with a 4.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-7167U pulls ahead with 1.5% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-7167U is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.5% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core i3-7167U still makes the most sense overall. Core i3-7167U comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 1.5% better PassMark.

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

Core i3-7167U makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2016) 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.

Core i3-7167U vs PRO A8-9600 Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-7167U

The Core i3-7167U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 January 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1356. Thermal design power (TDP): 28 Watt. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 3,368 points. Launch price was $304.

PRO A8-9600

The PRO A8-9600 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 3 October 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 3,318 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i3-7167U packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the PRO A8-9600 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the PRO A8-9600 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the Core i3-7167U versus 3.4 GHz on the PRO A8-9600 — a 19.4% clock advantage for the PRO A8-9600 (base: 2.8 GHz vs 3.1 GHz). The Core i3-7167U uses the Kaby Lake (2016−2019) architecture (14 nm), while the PRO A8-9600 uses Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-7167U scores 3,368 against the PRO A8-9600's 3,318 — a 1.5% lead for the Core i3-7167U.

Feature	Core i3-7167U	PRO A8-9600
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	2.8 GHz	3.4 GHz+21%
Base Clock	2.8 GHz	3.1 GHz+11%
L3 Cache	3 MB	—
L2 Cache	512 kB	2048 kB+300%
Process	14 nm-50%	28 nm
Architecture	Kaby Lake (2016−2019)	Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)
PassMark	3,368+2%	3,318

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-7167U uses the BGA1356 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the PRO A8-9600 uses AM4 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i3-7167U	PRO A8-9600
Socket	BGA1356	AM4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2133	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	12	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d (Core i3-7167U) / not specified (PRO A8-9600). The Core i3-7167U includes integrated graphics (Iris Plus Graphics 650), while the PRO A8-9600 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-7167U targets Mobile.