
A12-9800
Popular choices:

Core i5-4460T
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: +5.7% higher average FPS across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
Trade-offs
- ❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
Core i5-4460T
2014Why buy it
- ✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.
- ✅100% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than A12-9800 across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (3,651 vs 3,695).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $187 MSRP, while A12-9800 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
A12-9800
2017Core i5-4460T
2014Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +5.7% higher average FPS across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
Why buy it
- ✅Draws 35W instead of 65W, a 30W reduction.
- ✅100% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 8) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌85.7% higher power demand at 65W vs 35W.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than A12-9800 across 2 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark (3,651 vs 3,695).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $187 MSRP, while A12-9800 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Quick Answers
So, is A12-9800 better than Core i5-4460T?
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 i5-4460T |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 83 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 87 FPS |
| ultra | 76 FPS | 69 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 65 FPS | 63 FPS |
| medium | 58 FPS | 56 FPS |
| high | 45 FPS | 44 FPS |
| ultra | 36 FPS | 34 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | A12-9800 | Core i5-4460T |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 80 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 76 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 60 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 79 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 69 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 65 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 53 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 62 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 56 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 46 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 34 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | A12-9800 | Core i5-4460T |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | A12-9800 | Core i5-4460T |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| medium | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| high | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
| ultra | 92 FPS | 91 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of A12-9800 and Core i5-4460T

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 i5-4460T
Core i5-4460T
The Core i5-4460T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 March 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.9 GHz, with boost up to 2.7 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1150. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1333/1600, DDR3L-1333/1600. Passmark benchmark score: 3,651 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
Both the A12-9800 and Core i5-4460T share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4.2 GHz on the A12-9800 versus 2.7 GHz on the Core i5-4460T — a 43.5% clock advantage for the A12-9800 (base: 3.8 GHz vs 1.9 GHz). The A12-9800 uses the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Core i5-4460T uses Haswell (2013−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the A12-9800 scores 3,695 against the Core i5-4460T's 3,651 — a 1.2% lead for the A12-9800. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 635 vs 807, a 23.9% lead for the Core i5-4460T that directly translates to higher frame rates. L3 cache: 0 kB on the A12-9800 vs 6 MB (total) on the Core i5-4460T.
| Feature | A12-9800 | Core i5-4460T |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 4 | 4 / 4 |
| Boost Clock | 4.2 GHz+56% | 2.7 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.8 GHz+100% | 1.9 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) | Haswell (2013−2015) |
| PassMark | 3,695+1% | 3,651 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 635 | 807+27% |
Memory & Platform
The A12-9800 uses the AM4 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i5-4460T uses LGA1150 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2400 on the A12-9800 versus DDR3-1600 on the Core i5-4460T — the A12-9800 supports 28.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A12-9800 supports up to 64 GB of RAM compared to 32 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 8 (A12-9800) vs 16 (Core i5-4460T) — the Core i5-4460T offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: A320,B350,X370 (A12-9800) and H81,H87,Z87,Q87,H97,Z97 (Core i5-4460T).
| Feature | A12-9800 | Core i5-4460T |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | AM4 | LGA1150 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR4-2400+33% | DDR3-1600 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 64 GB+100% | 32 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | No | No |
| PCIe Lanes | 8 | 16+100% |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A12-9800) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i5-4460T). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon R7 (A12-9800) and HD Graphics 4600 (Core i5-4460T) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A12-9800 targets Budget, Core i5-4460T targets Low Power Desktop. Direct competitor: A12-9800 rivals Pentium G4600; Core i5-4460T rivals A8-7600.
| Feature | A12-9800 | Core i5-4460T |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | Yes |
| IGPU Model | Radeon R7 | HD Graphics 4600 |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | VT-x, VT-d, EPT |
| Target Use | Budget | Low Power Desktop |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













