A10-9620P vs FX-4100

#ad
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregated performance score

FX-4100
2011
4 cores / 4 threads
1.68
+1.8%

FX-4100 outperforms A10-9620P by a minimal 2% based on our aggregated benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-4100 and A10-9620P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking19471962
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.24no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataBristol Ridge
Architecture codenameZambezi (2011−2012)Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date12 October 2011 (12 years ago)1 January 2017 (7 years ago)
Current price$28 $886

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

FX-4100 and A10-9620P 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed3.6 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed3.8 GHz3.4 GHz
L1 cache192 KBno data
L2 cache4096 KB2 MB
L3 cache8192 KBno data
Chip lithography32 nm28 nm
Die size315 mm2250 mm2
Maximum core temperature71 °C90 °C
Number of transistors1,200 million3100 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierYesNo
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.1 V - Max: 1.4125 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-4100 and A10-9620P 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 configuration1no data
SocketAM3+FP4
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-4100 and A10-9620P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataDual-Channel DDR3/DDR4-1866 Memory Controller, PCIe 3.0 x8
AES-NI+no data
FMA+no data
AVX+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-4100 and A10-9620P are enumerated here.

AMD-V+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-4100 and A10-9620P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3, DDR4

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-4100 and A10-9620P.

PCIe versionn/ano 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.

FX-4100 1.68
+1.8%
A10-9620P 1.65

FX-4100 outperforms A10-9620P by 2% based on our aggregated 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%

FX-4100 2605
+1.9%
A10-9620P 2557

FX-4100 outperforms A10-9620P by 2% 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%

FX-4100 404
A10-9620P 500
+23.8%

A10-9620P outperforms FX-4100 by 24% 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%

FX-4100 1023
A10-9620P 1103
+7.8%

A10-9620P outperforms FX-4100 by 8% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.68 1.65
Recency 12 October 2011 1 January 2017
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 15 Watt

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between FX-4100 and A10-9620P.

Note that FX-4100 is a desktop processor while A10-9620P is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-4100 and A10-9620P, 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.


AMD FX-4100
FX-4100
AMD A10-9620P
A10-9620P

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.


3.9 824 votes

Rate FX-4100 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 280 votes

Rate A10-9620P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-4100 or A10-9620P, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.