A4-9120 vs FX-6350
Aggregate performance score
FX-6350 outperforms A4-9120 by a whopping 275% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing FX-6350 and A4-9120 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1670 | 2655 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Bristol Ridge |
| Power efficiency | 2.19 | 4.86 |
| Architecture codename | Vishera (2012−2015) | Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) |
| Release date | 29 April 2013 (11 years ago) | 1 June 2017 (7 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
FX-6350 and A4-9120 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 | 6 (Hexa-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 6 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 3.9 GHz | 2.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.2 GHz | 2.5 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 160 KB |
| L2 cache | 6144 KB | 1 MB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 28 nm |
| Die size | 315 mm2 | 124.5 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 61 °C | 90 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,200 million | 1200 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
| P0 Vcore voltage | Min: 1.25 V - Max: 1.4125 V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on FX-6350 and A4-9120 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 | no data |
| Socket | AM3+ | BGA |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-6350 and A4-9120. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Virtualization, |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-6350 and A4-9120 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-6350 and A4-9120. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | AMD Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge) ( - 655 MHz) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-6350 and A4-9120.
| PCIe version | n/a | 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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.89 | 0.77 |
| Recency | 29 April 2013 | 1 June 2017 |
| Physical cores | 6 | 2 |
| Threads | 6 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 15 Watt |
FX-6350 has a 275.3% higher aggregate performance score, and 200% more physical cores and 200% more threads.
A4-9120, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 733.3% lower power consumption.
The FX-6350 is our recommended choice as it beats the A4-9120 in performance tests.
Note that FX-6350 is a desktop processor while A4-9120 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between FX-6350 and A4-9120, 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.
