FX-4170 vs A8-3520M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-3520M
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
0.91
FX-4170
2012
4 cores / 4 threads, 125 Watt
1.91
+110%

FX-4170 outperforms A8-3520M by a whopping 110% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A8-3520M and FX-4170 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25221960
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD A-Seriesno data
Power efficiency2.461.45
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Zambezi (2011−2012)
Release date20 December 2011 (12 years ago)27 February 2012 (12 years ago)

Detailed specifications

A8-3520M and FX-4170 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 speed1.6 GHz4.2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.5 GHz4.3 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)192 KB
L2 cache1 MB (per core)4096 KB
L3 cache0 KB8192 KB
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size228 mm2315 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data61 °C
Number of transistors1,178 million1,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
P0 Vcore voltageno dataMin: 1.1875 V - Max: 1.4125 V

Compatibility

Information on A8-3520M and FX-4170 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
SocketFS1AM3+
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-3520M and FX-4170. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6620Gno data
AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-3520M and FX-4170 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-3520M and FX-4170. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon HD 6620G (444 MHz)no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A8-3520M and FX-4170.

PCIe versionno datan/a

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.

A8-3520M 0.91
FX-4170 1.91
+110%

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.

A8-3520M 1448
FX-4170 3034
+110%

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.

A8-3520M 255
FX-4170 464
+82%

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.

A8-3520M 687
FX-4170 1201
+74.8%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.91 1.91
Recency 20 December 2011 27 February 2012
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 125 Watt

A8-3520M has 257.1% lower power consumption.

FX-4170, on the other hand, has a 109.9% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 2 months.

The FX-4170 is our recommended choice as it beats the A8-3520M in performance tests.

Be aware that A8-3520M is a notebook processor while FX-4170 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between A8-3520M and FX-4170, 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 A8-3520M
A8-3520M
AMD FX-4170
FX-4170

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.


3.6 103 votes

Rate A8-3520M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 80 votes

Rate FX-4170 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A8-3520M or FX-4170, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.