Core i5-3340M vs A8-7650K
Aggregate performance score
A8-7650K outperforms i5-3340M by a moderate 16% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing A8-7650K and Core i5-3340M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1832 | 1942 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.52 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | AMD A-Series (Desktop) | Intel Core i5 |
| Architecture codename | Kaveri (2014−2015) | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) |
| Release date | 7 January 2015 (9 years ago) | 1 January 2013 (11 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $152 | $225 |
| Current price | $49 (0.3x MSRP) | $635 (2.8x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
A8-7650K and Core i5-3340M 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 | 3.3 GHz | 2.7 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 3.4 GHz |
| L1 cache | 256 KB | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 4096 KB | 256K (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 3 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | 245 mm2 | 118 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 72 °C | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | 2,411 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | Yes | No |
Compatibility
Information on A8-7650K and Core i5-3340M 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+ | FCBGA1023,FCPGA988 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-7650K and Core i5-3340M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | SSE1-4a, AVX, AES, FMA4, VT | Intel® AVX |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | no data |
| AVX | + | + |
| FRTC | 1 | no data |
| FreeSync | 1 | no data |
| PowerTune | - | no data |
| DualGraphics | 1 | no data |
| TrueAudio | + | no data |
| PowerNow | + | no data |
| PowerGating | + | no data |
| Out-of-band client management | + | no data |
| VirusProtect | + | no data |
| HSA | 1 | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| My WiFi | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | no data | + |
| Flex Memory Access | no data | + |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| FDI | no data | + |
| Fast Memory Access | no data | + |
| Status | no data | Discontinued |
Security technologies
A8-7650K and Core i5-3340M 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 A8-7650K and Core i5-3340M are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
| IOMMU 2.0 | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-7650K and Core i5-3340M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3-2133 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 32 GB |
| Max memory channels | 2 | 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 R7 Graphics | Intel HD Graphics 4000 |
| iGPU core count | 6 | no data |
| Number of pipelines | 384 | no data |
| Quick Sync Video | no data | + |
| Clear Video HD | no data | + |
| Enduro | + | no data |
| Switchable graphics | 1 | no data |
| UVD | + | no data |
| VCE | + | no data |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 1.25 GHz |
| InTru 3D | no data | + |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of A8-7650K and Core i5-3340M integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | + | + |
| HDMI | + | + |
| SDVO | no data | + |
| CRT | no data | + |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by A8-7650K and Core i5-3340M integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | no data |
| Vulkan | 1 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A8-7650K and Core i5-3340M.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 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.
A8-7650K outperforms Core i5-3340M by 16% 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%
A8-7650K outperforms Core i5-3340M by 16% 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 i5-3340M outperforms A8-7650K by 29% 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 i5-3340M outperforms A8-7650K by 5% 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%
A8-7650K outperforms Core i5-3340M by 6% 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 i5-3340M outperforms A8-7650K by 45% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.02 | 1.74 |
| Recency | 7 January 2015 | 1 January 2013 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Cost | $152 | $225 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 35 Watt |
The A8-7650K is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i5-3340M in performance tests.
Note that A8-7650K is a desktop processor while Core i5-3340M is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between A8-7650K and Core i5-3340M, 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.
