AMD A12-9700P vs FX-7600P

#ad
Buy
VS

Combined performance score

FX-7600P
1.70
+6.9%

FX-7600P outperforms A12-9700P by 7% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

Comparing FX-7600P and A12-9700P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking19201966
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD KaveriAMD Bristol Ridge
Architecture codenameKaveri (2014−2015)Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date4 June 2014 (9 years old)1 June 2016 (7 years old)
Current priceno data$536

Technical specs

FX-7600P and A12-9700P 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 speed2.7 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed3.6 GHz3.4 GHz
Bus supportBGA (FP3)no data
L2 cache4096 KB2048 KB
Chip lithography28 nm28 nm
Die size245 mm2250 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C90 °C
Number of transistors2410 Million3100 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on FX-7600P and A12-9700P 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.

SocketFP3FP4
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-7600P and A12-9700P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, FMA, DDR3-2133 ControllerDual-Channel DDR3/DDR4-1866 Memory Controller, PCIe 3.0 x8
AES-NI+1
FMA+FMA4
AVX+no data
FRTC11
FreeSyncno data1
PowerTune--
DualGraphicsno data1
TrueAudio+-
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
Out-of-band client management+-
VirusProtect+-
RAIDno data-
HSA1no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-7600P and A12-9700P are enumerated here.

AMD-V11
IOMMU 2.0+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-7600P and A12-9700P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-2133DDR3, DDR4-1866
Max memory channels22

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R7 GraphicsAMD Radeon R7 Graphics
iGPU core count86
Enduro++
Switchable graphics11
UVD++
VCE++

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of FX-7600P and A12-9700P integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort++
HDMI++

Graphics API support

APIs supported by FX-7600P and A12-9700P integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12DirectX® 12
Vulkan11

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-7600P and A12-9700P.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanesno data8

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-7600P 1.70
+6.9%
A12-9700P 1.59

FX-7600P outperforms A12-9700P by 7% in our combined 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-7600P 2611
+6.7%
A12-9700P 2446

FX-7600P outperforms A12-9700P by 7% in Passmark.

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

FX-7600P 2555
+5.2%
A12-9700P 2429

FX-7600P outperforms A12-9700P by 5% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

FX-7600P 7418
+20.3%
A12-9700P 6168

FX-7600P outperforms A12-9700P by 20% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

FX-7600P 3569
+2%
A12-9700P 3498

FX-7600P outperforms A12-9700P by 2% in 3DMark06 CPU.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

FX-7600P 2
+8.4%
A12-9700P 2

FX-7600P outperforms A12-9700P by 8% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

FX-7600P 228
+1.1%
A12-9700P 226

FX-7600P outperforms A12-9700P by 1% in Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 15%

FX-7600P 75
A12-9700P 79
+5.3%

A12-9700P outperforms FX-7600P by 5% in Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

FX-7600P 0.85
A12-9700P 0.85

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

FX-7600P 1.8
A12-9700P 1.8
+2.9%

A12-9700P outperforms FX-7600P by 3% in TrueCrypt AES.

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

FX-7600P 1500
+2.6%
A12-9700P 1462

FX-7600P outperforms A12-9700P by 3% in WinRAR 4.0.

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

FX-7600P 82
A12-9700P 85
+3.8%

A12-9700P outperforms FX-7600P by 4% in x264 encoding pass 1.

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Benchmark coverage: 13%

FX-7600P 18
+5.6%
A12-9700P 17

FX-7600P outperforms A12-9700P by 6% in x264 encoding pass 2.

Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

FX-7600P 1893
A12-9700P 2091
+10.5%

A12-9700P outperforms FX-7600P by 10% in Geekbench 3 32-bit single-core.

Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core

Benchmark coverage: 5%

FX-7600P 5308
A12-9700P 5464
+2.9%

A12-9700P outperforms FX-7600P by 3% in Geekbench 3 32-bit multi-core.

Gaming performance

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 1.70 1.59
Recency 4 June 2014 1 June 2016
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 15 Watt

We couldn't decide between FX-7600P and A12-9700P. The differences in performance seem too small.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-7600P and A12-9700P, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

User ratings

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


AMD FX-7600P
FX-7600P
AMD A12-9700P
A12-9700P

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.

User ratings: view and submit

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


4 9 votes

Rate AMD FX-7600P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 116 votes

Rate AMD A12-9700P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-7600P or A12-9700P, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.