A10-9600P vs Athlon X4 760K
Aggregate performance score
Athlon X4 760K outperforms A10-9600P by a significant 26% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Athlon X4 760K and A10-9600P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1888 | 2050 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | AMD Bristol Ridge |
| Architecture codename | Richland (2013−2014) | Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) |
| Release date | 1 June 2013 (11 years ago) | 1 June 2016 (8 years ago) |
| Current price | $31 | $494 |
Detailed specifications
Athlon X4 760K and A10-9600P 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.1 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| L1 cache | 192K | no data |
| L2 cache | 4 MB | 2048 KB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 28 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | 250 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 90 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,303 million | 3100 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | Yes | No |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon X4 760K and A10-9600P 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 | 1 | no data |
| Socket | FM2 | FP4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon X4 760K and A10-9600P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Dual-Channel DDR3/DDR4-1866 Memory Controller, PCIe 3.0 x8 |
| AES-NI | + | 1 |
| FMA | + | FMA4 |
| AVX | + | no data |
| FRTC | no data | 1 |
| FreeSync | no data | 1 |
| PowerTune | no data | - |
| DualGraphics | no data | 1 |
| TrueAudio | no data | - |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| PowerGating | no data | - |
| Out-of-band client management | no data | - |
| VirusProtect | no data | - |
| RAID | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon X4 760K and A10-9600P are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | 1 |
| IOMMU 2.0 | no data | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon X4 760K and A10-9600P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3-1866 | DDR3, DDR4-1866 |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon R5 Graphics |
| iGPU core count | no data | 6 |
| Enduro | no data | + |
| Switchable graphics | no data | 1 |
| UVD | no data | + |
| VCE | no data | + |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Athlon X4 760K and A10-9600P integrated GPUs.
| DisplayPort | no data | + |
| HDMI | no data | + |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Athlon X4 760K and A10-9600P integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | DirectX® 12 |
| Vulkan | no data | 1 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon X4 760K and A10-9600P.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 8 |
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.
Athlon X4 760K outperforms A10-9600P by 26% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
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%
Athlon X4 760K outperforms A10-9600P by 26% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
A10-9600P outperforms Athlon X4 760K by 2% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.91 | 1.51 |
| Recency | 1 June 2013 | 1 June 2016 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 100 Watt | 15 Watt |
The Athlon X4 760K is our recommended choice as it beats the A10-9600P in performance tests.
Note that Athlon X4 760K is a desktop processor while A10-9600P is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon X4 760K and A10-9600P, 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.
