Ryzen 5 4600G vs Core i7-950
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 5 4600G outperforms Core i7-950 by a whopping 402% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i7-950 and Ryzen 5 4600G processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1813 | 702 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | 21 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.74 | 35.34 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | Core i7 (Desktop) | AMD Ryzen 5 |
| Architecture codename | Bloomfield (2008−2010) | Renoir (2020−2022) |
| Release date | June 2009 (15 years ago) | 21 July 2020 (3 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $290 | no data |
| Current price | $135 (0.5x MSRP) | $174 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Ryzen 5 4600G has 4676% better value for money than i7-950.
Detailed specifications
Core i7-950 and Ryzen 5 4600G 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) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 3.06 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.33 GHz | 4.2 GHz |
| Bus support | 1333 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 8 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 7 nm |
| Die size | 263 mm2 | 156 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 68 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 95 °C |
| Number of transistors | 731 million | 9800 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | Yes |
Compatibility
Information on Core i7-950 and Ryzen 5 4600G 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 | 1 |
| Socket | FCLGA1366 | AM4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-950 and Ryzen 5 4600G. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.2 | no data |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 1.0 | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| PAE | 36 Bit | no data |
| Status | Discontinued | no data |
Security technologies
Core i7-950 and Ryzen 5 4600G technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-950 and Ryzen 5 4600G are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | no data | + |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-950 and Ryzen 5 4600G. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4-3200 |
| Maximum memory size | 24 GB | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | 3 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 51.196 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon Vega 7 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-950 and Ryzen 5 4600G.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
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.
Ryzen 5 4600G outperforms Core i7-950 by 402% 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%
Ryzen 5 4600G outperforms Core i7-950 by 401% 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%
Ryzen 5 4600G outperforms Core i7-950 by 240% 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%
Ryzen 5 4600G outperforms Core i7-950 by 293% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.07 | 10.39 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 6 |
| Threads | 8 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 130 Watt | 65 Watt |
The Ryzen 5 4600G is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i7-950 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-950 and Ryzen 5 4600G, 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.
