FX-9830P vs Apple M4 Max (16 cores)
Aggregate performance score
Apple M4 Max (16 cores) outperforms FX-9830P by a whopping 1232% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Apple M4 Max (16 cores) and FX-9830P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 168 | 1879 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Apple M4 | AMD Bristol Ridge |
| Power efficiency | 29.41 | 5.68 |
| Architecture codename | no data | Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) |
| Release date | 30 October 2024 (less than a year ago) | 31 May 2016 (8 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Apple M4 Max (16 cores) and FX-9830P 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 | 16 (Hexadeca-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 16 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.51 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 320 KB |
| L2 cache | no data | 1 MB (per module) |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 28 nm |
| Die size | no data | 250 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 90 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 3,100 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on Apple M4 Max (16 cores) and FX-9830P 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 | FP4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 90 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Apple M4 Max (16 cores) and FX-9830P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| FMA | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Apple M4 Max (16 cores) and FX-9830P are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Apple M4 Max (16 cores) and FX-9830P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3, DDR4 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Apple M4 40-core GPU | AMD Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge) ( - 900 MHz) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Apple M4 Max (16 cores) and FX-9830P.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 8 |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 27.97 | 2.10 |
| Recency | 30 October 2024 | 31 May 2016 |
| Physical cores | 16 | 4 |
| Threads | 16 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 90 Watt | 35 Watt |
Apple M4 Max (16 cores) has a 1231.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 833.3% more advanced lithography process.
FX-9830P, on the other hand, has 157.1% lower power consumption.
The Apple M4 Max (16 cores) is our recommended choice as it beats the FX-9830P in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Apple M4 Max (16 cores) and FX-9830P, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
