A12-9800
Popular choices:
Core i5-3335S
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
About PassMark
PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.
Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook
This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.
A12-9800
2017Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +4.5% higher average FPS across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R7, while Core i5-3335S needs a discrete GPU.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i5-3335S.
Trade-offs
- ❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.
Core i5-3335S
2012Why buy it
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than A12-9800 across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (3,672 vs 3,695).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $225 MSRP, while A12-9800 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while A12-9800 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A12-9800.
A12-9800
2017Core i5-3335S
2012Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +4.5% higher average FPS across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
- ✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R7, while Core i5-3335S needs a discrete GPU.
- ✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i5-3335S.
Why buy it
Trade-offs
- ❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than A12-9800 across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (3,672 vs 3,695).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $225 MSRP, while A12-9800 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while A12-9800 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
- ❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A12-9800.
Quick Answers
So, is A12-9800 better than Core i5-3335S?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Path of Exile 2
| Preset | A12-9800 | Core i5-3335S |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 84 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 87 FPS |
| ultra | 76 FPS | 69 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 65 FPS | 64 FPS |
| medium | 58 FPS | 56 FPS |
| high | 45 FPS | 44 FPS |
| ultra | 36 FPS | 34 FPS |
Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | A12-9800 | Core i5-3335S |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 88 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 76 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 56 FPS |
League of Legends
| Preset | A12-9800 | Core i5-3335S |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
Valorant
| Preset | A12-9800 | Core i5-3335S |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 92 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of A12-9800 and Core i5-3335S
A12-9800
A12-9800
The A12-9800 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 27 July 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 4.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 3,695 points. Launch price was $139.
Core i5-3335S
Core i5-3335S
The Core i5-3335S is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 November 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,672 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
Both the A12-9800 and Core i5-3335S share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4.2 GHz on the A12-9800 versus 3.2 GHz on the Core i5-3335S — a 27% clock advantage for the A12-9800 (base: 3.8 GHz vs 2.7 GHz). The A12-9800 uses the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Core i5-3335S uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the A12-9800 scores 3,695 against the Core i5-3335S's 3,672 — a 0.6% lead for the A12-9800. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A12-9800 vs 6 MB (total) on the Core i5-3335S.
| Feature | A12-9800 | Core i5-3335S |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 4 | 4 / 4 |
| Boost Clock | 4.2 GHz+31% | 3.2 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.8 GHz+41% | 2.7 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 6 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 2048 kB+700% | 256 kB (per core) |
| Process | 28 nm | 22 nm-21% |
| Architecture | Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) |
| PassMark | 3,695 | 3,672 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 635 | — |
Memory & Platform
The A12-9800 uses the AM4 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i5-3335S uses LGA1155 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | A12-9800 | Core i5-3335S |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | AM4 | LGA1155 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2400 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 64 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | No | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 8 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: AMD-V (A12-9800) / not specified (Core i5-3335S). The A12-9800 includes integrated graphics (Radeon R7), while the Core i5-3335S requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A12-9800 targets Budget. Direct competitor: A12-9800 rivals Pentium G4600.
| Feature | A12-9800 | Core i5-3335S |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | — |
| IGPU Model | Radeon R7 | — |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | — |
| Target Use | Budget | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on A12-9800 and Core i5-3335S
