Core i7-4600M vs A10-5800K
Aggregate performance score
Core i7-4600M outperforms A10-5800K by a small 8% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A10-5800K and Core i7-4600M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1878 | 1819 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 3.20 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | AMD A-Series (Desktop) | Intel Core i7 |
| Architecture codename | Trinity (2012−2013) | Haswell (2013−2015) |
| Release date | 2 October 2012 (11 years ago) | 1 September 2013 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $122 | $346 |
| Current price | $73 (0.6x MSRP) | $383 (1.1x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
A10-5800K and Core i7-4600M 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 | 2.9 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.2 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 256K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 4 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | 118 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °C | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 1,300 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | Yes | No |
Compatibility
Information on A10-5800K and Core i7-4600M 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 |
| Socket | FM2 | FCPGA946 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 37 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A10-5800K and Core i7-4600M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 |
| AES-NI | no data | + |
| AVX | no data | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| TSX | no data | - |
| Thermal Monitoring | no data | + |
| FDI | no data | + |
| Status | no data | Discontinued |
Security technologies
A10-5800K and Core i7-4600M technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| Identity Protection | no data | + |
| Anti-Theft | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A10-5800K and Core i7-4600M are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-5800K and Core i7-4600M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 32 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 25.6 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | no data | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon HD 7660D | Intel HD Graphics 4600 |
| Max video memory | no data | 2 GB |
| Quick Sync Video | no data | + |
| Clear Video HD | no data | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 1.3 GHz |
| InTru 3D | no data | + |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of A10-5800K and Core i7-4600M integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | no data | + |
| HDMI | no data | + |
| VGA | no data | + |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by A10-5800K and Core i7-4600M integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | no data | 3840x2160@30Hz |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | no data | 3840x2160@60Hz |
| Max resolution over VGA | no data | 2880x1800@60Hz |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by A10-5800K and Core i7-4600M integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | 11.2/12 |
| OpenGL | no data | 4.3 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A10-5800K and Core i7-4600M.
| PCIe version | no data | 3 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Core i7-4600M outperforms A10-5800K by 8% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Core i7-4600M outperforms A10-5800K by 7% in Passmark.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Core i7-4600M outperforms A10-5800K by 131% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Core i7-4600M outperforms A10-5800K by 79% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.
Benchmark coverage: 17%
Core i7-4600M outperforms A10-5800K by 1% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.
Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core
Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.
Benchmark coverage: 14%
Core i7-4600M outperforms A10-5800K by 46% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.91 | 2.06 |
| Integrated graphics card | 1.30 | 1.84 |
| Recency | 2 October 2012 | 1 September 2013 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Cost | $122 | $346 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 37 Watt |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A10-5800K and Core i7-4600M.
Note that A10-5800K is a desktop processor while Core i7-4600M is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between A10-5800K and Core i7-4600M, 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.
