FX-4150 vs A10-8700P

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A10-8700P
2015
4 cores / 4 threads, 12 Watt
1.41
FX-4150
2012
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
2.09
+48.2%

FX-4150 outperforms A10-8700P by a considerable 48% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A10-8700P and FX-4150 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking21971873
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Carrizono data
Power efficiency3.812.08
Architecture codenameCarrizo (2015−2018)Zambezi (2011−2012)
Release date3 June 2015 (9 years ago)23 October 2012 (12 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A10-8700P and FX-4150 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 speed1.8 GHz3.8 GHz
Boost clock speed3.2 GHz4 GHz
L1 cacheno data192 KB
L2 cache2048 KB4 MB
L3 cacheno data8 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm32 nm
Die sizeno data315 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Number of transistors3100 Million1,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on A10-8700P and FX-4150 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 configurationno data1
SocketFP4AM3+
Power consumption (TDP)12 - 35 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A10-8700P and FX-4150. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsHSA 1.0no data
AES-NI++
FMAFMA4+
AVXAVX+
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-
DualGraphics+-
TrueAudio+-
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
Out-of-band client management+-
VirusProtect+-
HSA+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A10-8700P and FX-4150 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A10-8700P and FX-4150. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-2133DDR3
Max memory channels2no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R6 Graphicsno data
iGPU core count6no data
Enduro+-
Switchable graphics+-
UVD+-
VCE+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A10-8700P and FX-4150 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A10-8700P and FX-4150 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A10-8700P and FX-4150.

PCIe version3.02.0

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.

A10-8700P 1.41
FX-4150 2.09
+48.2%

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.

A10-8700P 2245
FX-4150 3327
+48.2%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.41 2.09
Recency 3 June 2015 23 October 2012
Chip lithography 28 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 12 Watt 95 Watt

A10-8700P has an age advantage of 2 years, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 691.7% lower power consumption.

FX-4150, on the other hand, has a 48.2% higher aggregate performance score.

The FX-4150 is our recommended choice as it beats the A10-8700P in performance tests.

Be aware that A10-8700P is a notebook processor while FX-4150 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A10-8700P and FX-4150, 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 A10-8700P
A10-8700P
AMD FX-4150
FX-4150

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.


3.2 119 votes

Rate A10-8700P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 23 votes

Rate FX-4150 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A10-8700P or FX-4150, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.