Core i7-2617M vs PRO A4-8350B

Core i7-2617M vs PRO A4-8350B Performance Spectrum

Core i7-2617M

2 / 4

1,687

0.0%

Pentium Dual-Core E2180

1,690

+0.2%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

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 i7-2617M vs PRO A4-8350B 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 i7-2617M vs PRO A4-8350B: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i7-2617M

2011

Why buy it

✅Draws 17W instead of 65W, a 48W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 3000, while PRO A4-8350B needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than PRO A4-8350B across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (1,687 vs 1,690).

PRO A4-8350B

2015

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.2% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌282.4% higher power demand at 65W vs 17W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-2617M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is PRO A4-8350B better than Core i7-2617M?

Yes. PRO A4-8350B is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 3.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.2% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, PRO A4-8350B is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.2% 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, PRO A4-8350B is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

PRO A4-8350B still makes the most sense overall. PRO A4-8350B comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

PRO A4-8350B makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2015 vs 2011) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i7-2617M vs PRO A4-8350B Technical Specifications

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

Core i7-2617M

The Core i7-2617M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 January 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333. Passmark benchmark score: 1,687 points. Launch price was $100.

PRO A4-8350B

The PRO A4-8350B is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 29 September 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Kaveri (2014−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L2 cache: 1024 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FM2+. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1866. Passmark benchmark score: 1,690 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-2617M packs 2 cores / 4 threads, matching the PRO A4-8350B's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Core i7-2617M versus 3.9 GHz on the PRO A4-8350B — a 40% clock advantage for the PRO A4-8350B (base: 1.5 GHz vs 3.5 GHz). The Core i7-2617M uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the PRO A4-8350B uses Kaveri (2014−2015) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-2617M scores 1,687 against the PRO A4-8350B's 1,690 — a 0.2% lead for the PRO A4-8350B.

Feature	Core i7-2617M	PRO A4-8350B
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.6 GHz	3.9 GHz+50%
Base Clock	1.5 GHz	3.5 GHz+133%
L3 Cache	4 MB	—
L2 Cache	512 kB	1024 kB+100%
Process	32 nm	28 nm-13%
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	Kaveri (2014−2015)
PassMark	1,687	1,690
Geekbench 6 Single	448	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-2617M uses the BGA1023 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the PRO A4-8350B uses FM2+ (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i7-2617M	PRO A4-8350B
Socket	BGA1023	FM2+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	—
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i7-2617M) / not specified (PRO A4-8350B). The Core i7-2617M includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 3000), while the PRO A4-8350B requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-2617M targets Ultrabook. Direct competitor: Core i7-2617M rivals A6-3400M.