Core i7-920 vs FX-8150
Aggregated performance score
FX-8150 outperforms Core i7-920 by 86% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing FX-8150 and Core i7-920 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1462 | 1891 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.24 | 1.22 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | no data | Core i7 (Desktop) |
| Architecture codename | Zambezi (2011−2012) | Bloomfield (2008−2010) |
| Release date | 12 October 2011 (12 years ago) | November 2008 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $340 |
| Current price | $86 | $65 (0.2x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
FX-8150 has 2% better value for money than i7-920.
Detailed specifications
FX-8150 and Core i7-920 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 | 8 (Octa-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | 3.6 GHz | 2.66 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.2 GHz | 2.93 GHz |
| Bus support | no data | 1333 MHz |
| L1 cache | 384 KB | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 8192 KB | 256 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 8192 KB | 8 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 315 mm2 | 263 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 61 °C | 68 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,200 million | 731 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | Yes | No |
| P0 Vcore voltage | Min: 1.0125 V - Max: 1.4125 V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on FX-8150 and Core i7-920 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 | AM3+ | FCLGA1366,PLGA1366 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 130 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8150 and Core i7-920. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.2 |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| FMA | + | no data |
| AVX | + | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 1.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | no data | - |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| PAE | no data | 36 Bit |
| Status | no data | Discontinued |
Security technologies
FX-8150 and Core i7-920 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 FX-8150 and Core i7-920 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 FX-8150 and Core i7-920. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 24 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 3 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 25.6 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | no data | - |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8150 and Core i7-920.
| 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.
FX-8150 outperforms Core i7-920 by 86% 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-8150 outperforms Core i7-920 by 86% 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-8150 outperforms Core i7-920 by 5% 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-8150 outperforms Core i7-920 by 21% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
3DMark Fire Strike Physics
Benchmark coverage: 4%
FX-8150 outperforms Core i7-920 by 54% in 3DMark Fire Strike Physics.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 3.40 | 1.83 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 130 Watt |
The FX-8150 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i7-920 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8150 and Core i7-920, 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.
