A10-7800 vs FX-4150

VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-4150
2012
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
2.17
+3.3%

FX-4150 outperforms A10-7800 by a minimal 3% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-4150 and A10-7800 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking18681909
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency2.082.95
Architecture codenameZambezi (2011−2012)Kaveri (2014−2015)
Release date23 October 2012 (12 years ago)31 July 2014 (10 years ago)

Detailed specifications

FX-4150 and A10-7800 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 speed3.8 GHz3.5 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz3.9 GHz
L1 cache192 KB256 KB
L2 cache4 MB4096 KB
L3 cache8 MB (shared)no data
Chip lithography32 nm28 nm
Die size315 mm2245 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data71 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data74 °C
Number of transistors1,200 million2,411 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier+-

Compatibility

Information on FX-4150 and A10-7800 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
SocketAM3+FM2+
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-4150 and A10-7800. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
FMA++
AVX++
FRTC-+
FreeSync-+
DualGraphics-+
TrueAudio-+
PowerNow-+
PowerGating-+
Out-of-band client management-+
VirusProtect-+
HSA-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-4150 and A10-7800 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-4150 and A10-7800. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3-2133
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon R7 Graphics
iGPU core countno data8
Number of pipelinesno data512
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of FX-4150 and A10-7800 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by FX-4150 and A10-7800 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-4150 and A10-7800.

PCIe version2.03.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

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-4150 2.17
+3.3%
A10-7800 2.10

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.

FX-4150 3327
+3.7%
A10-7800 3209

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.17 2.10
Recency 23 October 2012 31 July 2014
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 65 Watt

FX-4150 has a 3.3% higher aggregate performance score.

A10-7800, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 46.2% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between FX-4150 and A10-7800.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-4150 and A10-7800, 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-4150
FX-4150
AMD A10-7800
A10-7800

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.


3.7 23 votes

Rate FX-4150 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 294 votes

Rate A10-7800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-4150 or A10-7800, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.