GX-210JA vs A12-9800E

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing A12-9800E and GX-210JA processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking1741not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation1.63no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD
Architecture codenameBristol Ridge (2016−2019)Temash (2013)
Release date27 July 2017 (6 years ago)23 May 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$105no data
Current price$199 (1.9x MSRP)$449

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

A12-9800E and GX-210JA 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed3.1 GHzno data
Boost clock speed3.8 GHz1 GHz
L1 cacheno data128 KB
L2 cache2048 KB1 MB
L3 cache0 KBno data
Chip lithography28 nm28 nm
Die size246 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,178 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on A12-9800E and GX-210JA 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 configuration1no data
SocketAM4FT3 BGA
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A12-9800E and GX-210JA. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno data86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, DDR3-1066 Memory Controller
AES-NI++
FMA+no data
AVX++
FRTC1no data
FreeSync1no data
PowerTune+no data
TrueAudio+no data
PowerNow+no data
PowerGating+no data
VirusProtect+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A12-9800E and GX-210JA are enumerated here.

AMD-V+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A12-9800E and GX-210JA. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2400DDR3
Max memory channels2no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R7 Graphicsno data
iGPU core count8no data
Enduro+no data
UVD+no data
VCE+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A12-9800E and GX-210JA integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+no data
HDMI+no data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A12-9800E and GX-210JA integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan1no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A12-9800E and GX-210JA.

PCIe version3.0no data
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.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

A12-9800E 3471
+1300%
GX-210JA 248

A12-9800E outperforms GX-210JA by 1300% in Passmark.

Pros & cons summary


Recency 27 July 2017 23 May 2013
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 6 Watt

We couldn't decide between A12-9800E and GX-210JA. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that A12-9800E is a desktop processor while GX-210JA is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A12-9800E and GX-210JA, 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 A12-9800E
A12-9800E
AMD GX-210JA
GX-210JA

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 48 votes

Rate A12-9800E on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 3 votes

Rate GX-210JA on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A12-9800E or GX-210JA, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.