FX-4350 vs A12-9700P

VS

Aggregate performance score

A12-9700P
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
1.59

FX-4350 outperforms A12-9700P by a substantial 36% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A12-9700P and FX-4350 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking21211876
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Bristol Ridgeno data
Power efficiency9.671.58
Architecture codenameBristol Ridge (2016−2019)Vishera (2012−2015)
Release date1 June 2016 (8 years ago)29 April 2013 (11 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A12-9700P and FX-4350 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 speed2.5 GHz4.2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.4 GHz4.3 GHz
L2 cache2048 KB4096 KB
Chip lithography28 nm32 nm
Die size250 mm2315 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °C61 °C
Number of transistors3100 Million1,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier-+
P0 Vcore voltageno dataMin: 1.275 V - Max: 1.4 V

Compatibility

Information on A12-9700P and FX-4350 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)15 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A12-9700P and FX-4350. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
FMAFMA4+
AVX-+
FRTC+-
FreeSync+-
DualGraphics+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A12-9700P and FX-4350 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A12-9700P and FX-4350. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR3
Max memory channels2no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R7 GraphicsOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)
iGPU core count6no data
Enduro+-
Switchable graphics+-
UVD+-
VCE+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A12-9700P and FX-4350 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A12-9700P and FX-4350 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A12-9700P and FX-4350.

PCIe version3.0n/a
PCI Express lanes8no 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.

A12-9700P 1.59
FX-4350 2.17
+36.5%

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.

A12-9700P 2428
FX-4350 3314
+36.5%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.59 2.17
Recency 1 June 2016 29 April 2013
Chip lithography 28 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 125 Watt

A12-9700P has an age advantage of 3 years, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 733.3% lower power consumption.

FX-4350, on the other hand, has a 36.5% higher aggregate performance score.

The FX-4350 is our recommended choice as it beats the A12-9700P in performance tests.

Be aware that A12-9700P is a notebook processor while FX-4350 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A12-9700P and FX-4350, 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 A12-9700P
A12-9700P
AMD FX-4350
FX-4350

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.


3.6 121 vote

Rate A12-9700P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 546 votes

Rate FX-4350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A12-9700P or FX-4350, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.