Phenom X4 9600 vs A10-7800

VS

Aggregate performance score

A10-7800
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
2.02
+100%
Phenom X4 9600
2007
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.01

A10-7800 outperforms Phenom X4 9600 by a whopping 100% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A10-7800 and Phenom X4 9600 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking19152450
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency2.941.01
Architecture codenameKaveri (2014−2015)Agena (2007−2008)
Release date31 July 2014 (10 years ago)November 2007 (17 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A10-7800 and Phenom X4 9600 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)
Threads44
Base clock speed3.5 GHzno data
Boost clock speed3.9 GHz2.3 GHz
L1 cache256 KB128 KB (per core)
L2 cache4096 KB512 KB (per core)
L3 cacheno data2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm65 nm
Die size245 mm2285 mm2
Maximum core temperature71 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors2,411 million450 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibilityno data-

Compatibility

Information on A10-7800 and Phenom X4 9600 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
SocketFM2+AM2+
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A10-7800 and Phenom X4 9600. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-
DualGraphics+-
TrueAudio+-
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
Out-of-band client management+-
VirusProtect+-
HSA+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A10-7800 and Phenom X4 9600 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-7800 and Phenom X4 9600. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-2133no data
Max memory channels2no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R7 Graphicsno data
iGPU core count8no data
Number of pipelines512no data
Enduro+-
Switchable graphics+-
UVD+-
VCE+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A10-7800 and Phenom X4 9600 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A10-7800 and Phenom X4 9600 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A10-7800 and Phenom X4 9600.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes16no data

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.

A10-7800 2.02
+100%
Phenom X4 9600 1.01

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.

A10-7800 3207
+99.6%
Phenom X4 9600 1607

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.

A10-7800 433
+107%
Phenom X4 9600 209

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.

A10-7800 1079
+55%
Phenom X4 9600 696

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.02 1.01
Chip lithography 28 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 95 Watt

A10-7800 has a 100% higher aggregate performance score, a 132.1% more advanced lithography process, and 46.2% lower power consumption.

The A10-7800 is our recommended choice as it beats the Phenom X4 9600 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between A10-7800 and Phenom X4 9600, 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.


AMD A10-7800
A10-7800
AMD Phenom X4 9600
Phenom X4 9600

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.


3.7 299 votes

Rate A10-7800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 33 votes

Rate Phenom X4 9600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A10-7800 or Phenom X4 9600, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.