Phenom X3 8550 vs Apple M4 Pro (14 cores)
Aggregate performance score
M4 Pro (14 cores) outperforms Phenom X3 8550 by a whopping 3228% 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 | 307 | 2964 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.03 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | Apple M4 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 22.97 | 0.29 |
| Designer | Apple | AMD |
| Architecture codename | no data | Toliman (2008) |
| Release date | 30 October 2024 (1 year ago) | April 2008 (17 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $170 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
M4 Pro (14 cores) and Phenom X3 8550 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 | 14 (Tetradeca-Core) | 3 (Tri-Core) |
| Threads | 14 | 3 |
| Boost clock speed | 4.5 GHz | 2.2 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 2 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | no data | 285 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 450 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on M4 Pro (14 cores) and Phenom X3 8550 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 | 95 Watt |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by M4 Pro (14 cores) and Phenom X3 8550 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Apple M4 20-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 | 21.63 | 0.65 |
| Physical cores | 14 | 3 |
| Threads | 14 | 3 |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 40 Watt | 95 Watt |
Apple M4 Pro (14 cores) has a 3227.7% higher aggregate performance score, 366.7% more physical cores and 366.7% more threads, a 2066.7% more advanced lithography process, and 137.5% lower power consumption.
The Apple M4 Pro (14 cores) is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Phenom X3 8550 in performance tests.
Be aware that Apple M4 Pro (14 cores) is a notebook processor while Phenom X3 8550 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.
