i5-7210U vs A10-5800K
Primary details
Comparing A10-5800K and Core i5-7210U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1955 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.28 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | AMD A-Series (Desktop) | Intel Core i5 |
| Architecture codename | Trinity (2012−2013) | Kaby Lake (2016−2019) |
| Release date | 2 October 2012 (11 years ago) | no data |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $122 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
A10-5800K and Core i5-7210U basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 3.8 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 4.2 GHz | 2.5 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | OPI |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 25 |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 3 MB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on A10-5800K and Core i5-7210U compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | FM2 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A10-5800K and Core i5-7210U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A10-5800K and Core i5-7210U are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-5800K and Core i5-7210U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | LPDDR3-1866 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 32 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 34.134 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon HD 7660D | Intel HD Graphics 620 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A10-5800K and Core i5-7210U.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 12 |
Pros & cons summary
| Integrated graphics card | 1.30 | 2.42 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 15 Watt |
A10-5800K has 100% more physical cores.
i5-7210U, on the other hand, has 86.2% faster integrated GPU, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 566.7% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between A10-5800K and Core i5-7210U. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that A10-5800K is a desktop processor while Core i5-7210U is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between A10-5800K and Core i5-7210U, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
