A12-9700P vs i5-3230M

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i5-3230M
2013
2 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
1.61
+5.2%
A12-9700P
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
1.53

Core i5-3230M outperforms A12-9700P by a small 5% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i5-3230M and A12-9700P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking21032138
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core i5AMD Bristol Ridge
Power efficiency4.359.65
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date1 January 2013 (11 years ago)1 June 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$225no data

Detailed specifications

Core i5-3230M and A12-9700P 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 cores2 (Dual-core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed2.6 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed3.2 GHz3.4 GHz
Bus rate5 GT/sno data
L1 cache64K (per core)no data
L2 cache256K (per core)2048 KB
L3 cache3 MB (shared)no data
Chip lithography22 nm28 nm
Die size118 mm2250 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C90 °C
Number of transistorsno data3100 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Core i5-3230M and A12-9700P 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 configuration1no data
SocketFCPGA988FP4
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i5-3230M and A12-9700P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® AVXno data
AES-NI++
FMA-FMA4
AVX+-
FRTC-+
FreeSync-+
DualGraphics-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
My WiFi+no data
Turbo Boost Technology2.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data

Security technologies

Core i5-3230M and A12-9700P technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Secure Key+no data
Identity Protection+-
Anti-Theft+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i5-3230M and A12-9700P 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 Core i5-3230M and A12-9700P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3, DDR4
Maximum memory size32 GBno data
Max memory channels22
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 4000AMD Radeon R7 Graphics
iGPU core countno data6
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video HD+no data
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+
Graphics max frequency1.1 GHzno data
InTru 3D+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i5-3230M and A12-9700P integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data
eDP+no data
DisplayPort++
HDMI++
SDVO+no data
CRT+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Core i5-3230M and A12-9700P integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i5-3230M and A12-9700P.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes168

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.

i5-3230M 1.61
+5.2%
A12-9700P 1.53

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.

i5-3230M 2562
+5.3%
A12-9700P 2432

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.

i5-3230M 4268
+75.7%
A12-9700P 2429

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.

i5-3230M 9159
+48.5%
A12-9700P 6168

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

i5-3230M 3760
+7.5%
A12-9700P 3498

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.

i5-3230M 3
+30.8%
A12-9700P 2

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

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

i5-3230M 258
+14.4%
A12-9700P 226

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.

i5-3230M 105
+32.9%
A12-9700P 79

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.

i5-3230M 1.25
+47.1%
A12-9700P 0.85

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

i5-3230M 1.5
A12-9700P 1.8
+20%

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.

i5-3230M 3219
+120%
A12-9700P 1462

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.  

i5-3230M 11
A12-9700P 17
+45.5%

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.  

i5-3230M 60
A12-9700P 85
+41.1%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.61 1.53
Recency 1 January 2013 1 June 2016
Physical cores 2 4
Chip lithography 22 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 15 Watt

i5-3230M has a 5.2% higher aggregate performance score, and a 27.3% more advanced lithography process.

A12-9700P, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, 100% more physical cores, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Core i5-3230M and A12-9700P.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i5-3230M and A12-9700P, 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.


Intel Core i5-3230M
Core i5-3230M
AMD A12-9700P
A12-9700P

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.


3.8 1117 votes

Rate Core i5-3230M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 121 vote

Rate A12-9700P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i5-3230M or A12-9700P, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.