Athlon 64 X2 4000+ vs Apple M4 (10 cores)
Aggregate performance score
M4 (10 cores) outperforms Athlon 64 X2 4000+ by a whopping 3285% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 599 | 3218 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Apple Apple M4 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 14.34 | 0.19 |
| Designer | Apple | AMD |
| Architecture codename | no data | Windsor (2006−2007) |
| Release date | 7 May 2024 (1 year ago) | May 2006 (19 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
M4 (10 cores) and Athlon 64 X2 4000+ 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 cores | 10 (Deca-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 10 | 2 |
| Boost clock speed | 4.4 GHz | 2 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 256 KB |
| L2 cache | 4 MB | 512K |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | no data | 220 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 28 Million | 154 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on M4 (10 cores) and Athlon 64 X2 4000+ 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 configuration | no data | 1 |
| Socket | no data | AM2 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 40 Watt | 89 Watt |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Apple M4 10-core GPU | no data |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 13.54 | 0.40 |
| Physical cores | 10 | 2 |
| Threads | 10 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 40 Watt | 89 Watt |
Apple M4 (10 cores) has a 3285% higher aggregate performance score, 400% more physical cores and 400% more threads, a 2900% more advanced lithography process, and 122.5% lower power consumption.
The Apple M4 (10 cores) is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Athlon 64 X2 4000+ in performance tests.
Be aware that Apple M4 (10 cores) is a notebook processor while Athlon 64 X2 4000+ is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
