Pentium 4 560 vs Athlon X4 950

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon X4 950
2017, $60
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
2.03
+968%

Athlon X4 950 outperforms Pentium 4 560 by a whopping 968% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking20983503
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.66no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Seriesno dataPentium 4
Power efficiency3.35no data
DesignerAMDIntel
Architecture codenameBristol Ridge (2016−2019)Prescott (2001−2005)
Release date27 July 2017 (8 years ago)no data
Launch price (MSRP)$60no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Performance to price scatter graph

Detailed specifications

Athlon X4 950 and Pentium 4 560 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)1 (Single-Core)
Threads41
Base clock speed3.5 GHzno data
Boost clock speed3.8 GHz3.6 GHz
Bus rateno data800 MHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)16 KB
L2 cache512 KB (per core)1 MB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography28 nm90 nm
Die size246 mm2109 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,178 million125 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on Athlon X4 950 and Pentium 4 560 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
SocketAM4775
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt1 MB

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon X4 950 and Pentium 4 560. 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 Athlon X4 950 and Pentium 4 560 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon X4 950 and Pentium 4 560. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Dual-channelDDR1, DDR2, DDR3

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.03 0.19
Physical cores 4 1
Threads 4 1
Chip lithography 28 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 1 Watt

Athlon X4 950 has a 968.4% higher aggregate performance score, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.

Pentium 4 560, on the other hand, has 6400% lower power consumption.

The AMD Athlon X4 950 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Pentium 4 560 in performance tests.

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 Athlon X4 950
Athlon X4 950
Intel Pentium 4 560
Pentium 4 560

Other comparisons

We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.7 310 votes

Rate Athlon X4 950 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 21 votes

Rate Pentium 4 560 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Comments

Here you can give us your opinion about processors Athlon X4 950 and Pentium 4 560, agree or disagree with our ratings, or report bugs or inaccuracies on the site.