Phenom X4 9650 vs Celeron N6211

Aggregate performance score

Celeron N6211
2022
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
1.41
+29.4%
Phenom X4 9650
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.09

Celeron N6211 outperforms Phenom X4 9650 by a significant 29% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N6211 and Phenom X4 9650 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22122416
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation3.33no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesElkhart Lakeno data
Power efficiency20.521.09
Architecture codenameElkhart Lake (2022)Agena (2007−2008)
Release date17 July 2022 (2 years ago)March 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$54no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron N6211 and Phenom X4 9650 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 cores2 (Dual-core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed1.2 GHzno data
Boost clock speed3 GHz2.3 GHz
L1 cacheno data128 KB (per core)
L2 cache1.5 MB512 KB (per core)
L3 cacheno data2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography10 nm65 nm
Die sizeno data285 mm2
Maximum core temperature70 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data450 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+-

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N6211 and Phenom X4 9650 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 configurationno data1
SocketBGA1493AM2+
Power consumption (TDP)6.5 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N6211 and Phenom X4 9650. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N6211 and Phenom X4 9650 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron N6211 and Phenom X4 9650. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel UHD Graphics (Jasper Lake 16 EU) (250 - 750 MHz)no data

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.

Celeron N6211 1.41
+29.4%
Phenom X4 9650 1.09

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.

Celeron N6211 2245
+29.5%
Phenom X4 9650 1733

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.41 1.09
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 10 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt 95 Watt

Celeron N6211 has a 29.4% higher aggregate performance score, a 550% more advanced lithography process, and 1483.3% lower power consumption.

Phenom X4 9650, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

The Celeron N6211 is our recommended choice as it beats the Phenom X4 9650 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N6211 and Phenom X4 9650, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Celeron N6211
Celeron N6211
AMD Phenom X4 9650
Phenom X4 9650

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.

Community ratings

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


2.3 4 votes

Rate Celeron N6211 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.8 226 votes

Rate Phenom X4 9650 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N6211 or Phenom X4 9650, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.