Core i3-N305 vs A10-9620P

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A10-9620P
2017
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
1.65

Core i3-N305 outperforms A10-9620P by a whopping 296% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A10-9620P and Core i3-N305 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking1985982
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesBristol Ridgeno data
Architecture codenameBristol Ridge (2016−2019)Alder Lake-N
Release date1 January 2017 (7 years ago)3 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Current price$886 no data

Detailed specifications

A10-9620P and Core i3-N305 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads48
Base clock speed2.5 GHz0.1 GHz
Boost clock speed3.4 GHz3.8 GHz
L1 cacheno data96 KB (per core)
L2 cache2 MB2 MB (per module)
L3 cacheno data6 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size250 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature90 °C105 °C
Number of transistors3100 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on A10-9620P and Core i3-N305 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 configurationno data1
SocketFP4FCBGA1264
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A10-9620P and Core i3-N305. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsDual-Channel DDR3/DDR4-1866 Memory Controller, PCIe 3.0 x8Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NIno data+
FMAno data+
AVXno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data+
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Thermal Monitoringno data+
GPIOno data+
Statusno dataLaunched

Security technologies

A10-9620P and Core i3-N305 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A10-9620P and Core i3-N305 are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-9620P and Core i3-N305. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR4, DDR5
Maximum memory sizeno data16 GB
Max memory channelsno data1
ECC memory supportno data-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge)Intel UHD Graphics
Quick Sync Videono data+
Graphics max frequencyno data1.25 GHz
Execution Unitsno data32

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A10-9620P and Core i3-N305 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by A10-9620P and Core i3-N305 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution supportno data+
Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096 x 2160@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data4096 x 2160@60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A10-9620P and Core i3-N305 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12.1
OpenGLno data4.6

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A10-9620P and Core i3-N305.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data9
USB revisionno data2.0/3.2

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.

A10-9620P 1.65
i3-N305 6.53
+296%

Core i3-N305 outperforms A10-9620P by 296% 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%

A10-9620P 2559
i3-N305 10095
+294%

Core i3-N305 outperforms A10-9620P by 294% in Passmark.

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

A10-9620P 2277
i3-N305 5651
+148%

Core i3-N305 outperforms A10-9620P by 148% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

A10-9620P 7420
i3-N305 26169
+253%

Core i3-N305 outperforms A10-9620P by 253% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

A10-9620P 14.41
+148%
i3-N305 35.77

Core i3-N305 outperforms A10-9620P by 148% in wPrime 32.

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%

A10-9620P 3
i3-N305 11
+326%

Core i3-N305 outperforms A10-9620P by 326% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

A10-9620P 230
i3-N305 829
+260%

Core i3-N305 outperforms A10-9620P by 260% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made 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 (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

A10-9620P 72
i3-N305 165
+129%

Core i3-N305 outperforms A10-9620P by 129% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-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%

A10-9620P 0.81
i3-N305 2.05
+153%

Core i3-N305 outperforms A10-9620P by 153% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A10-9620P 1329
i3-N305 3377
+154%

Core i3-N305 outperforms A10-9620P by 154% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A10-9620P 16
i3-N305 56
+243%

Core i3-N305 outperforms A10-9620P by 243% in x264 encoding pass 2.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

A10-9620P 77
i3-N305 203
+164%

Core i3-N305 outperforms A10-9620P by 164% in x264 encoding pass 1.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.65 6.53
Recency 1 January 2017 3 January 2023
Physical cores 4 8
Threads 4 8

The Core i3-N305 is our recommended choice as it beats the A10-9620P in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A10-9620P and Core i3-N305, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD A10-9620P
A10-9620P
Intel Core i3-N305
Core i3-N305

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.3 284 votes

Rate A10-9620P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 482 votes

Rate Core i3-N305 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A10-9620P or Core i3-N305, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.