A8-3800 vs i7-920

VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i7-920
2008
4 cores / 8 threads, 130 Watt
1.79
+38.8%
A8-3800
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
1.29

Core i7-920 outperforms A8-3800 by a substantial 39% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i7-920 and A8-3800 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking20132273
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.22no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesCore i7 (Desktop)no data
Power efficiency1.301.88
Architecture codenameBloomfield (2008−2010)Llano (2011−2012)
Release dateNovember 2008 (16 years ago)30 June 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$340no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Core i7-920 and A8-3800 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads84
Base clock speed2.66 GHz2.4 GHz
Boost clock speed2.93 GHz2.7 GHz
Bus rate1333 MHzno data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)128 KB (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache8 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm32 nm
Die size263 mm2228 mm2
Maximum core temperature68 °Cno data
Number of transistors731 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Core i7-920 and A8-3800 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 configuration11
SocketFCLGA1366,PLGA1366FM1
Power consumption (TDP)130 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-920 and A8-3800. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology1.0no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
PAE36 Bitno data

Security technologies

Core i7-920 and A8-3800 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-920 and A8-3800 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-920 and A8-3800. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size24 GBno data
Max memory channels3no data
Maximum memory bandwidth25.6 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon HD 6550D

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.

i7-920 1.79
+38.8%
A8-3800 1.29

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.

i7-920 2837
+38.5%
A8-3800 2049

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.

i7-920 415
+42.6%
A8-3800 291

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.

i7-920 1424
+60.2%
A8-3800 889

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.79 1.29
Threads 8 4
Chip lithography 45 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 130 Watt 65 Watt

i7-920 has a 38.8% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more threads.

A8-3800, on the other hand, has a 40.6% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.

The Core i7-920 is our recommended choice as it beats the A8-3800 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-920 and A8-3800, 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 i7-920
Core i7-920
AMD A8-3800
A8-3800

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.


3.7 399 votes

Rate Core i7-920 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 70 votes

Rate A8-3800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i7-920 or A8-3800, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.