A10-9600P vs FX-8370
Aggregate performance score
FX-8370 outperforms A10-9600P by a whopping 165% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing FX-8370 and A10-9600P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1363 | 2054 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.01 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | AMD Bristol Ridge |
| Architecture codename | Vishera (2012−2015) | Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) |
| Release date | 2 September 2014 (9 years ago) | 1 June 2016 (8 years ago) |
| Current price | $194 | $494 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
FX-8370 and A10-9600P 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 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 4 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.3 GHz | 3.3 GHz |
| L1 cache | 384 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 8 MB | 2 MB |
| L3 cache | 8 MB (shared) | no data |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 28 nm |
| Die size | 315 mm2 | 250 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 90 °C |
| Number of transistors | 1,200 million | 3100 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | Yes | No |
Compatibility
Information on FX-8370 and A10-9600P 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+ | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8370 and A10-9600P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Dual-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-8370 and A10-9600P are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-8370 and A10-9600P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3, DDR4 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | AMD Radeon R5 (Bristol Ridge) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8370 and A10-9600P.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 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-8370 outperforms A10-9600P by 165% based on our aggregate 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-8370 outperforms A10-9600P by 164% 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-8370 outperforms A10-9600P by 10% 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-8370 outperforms A10-9600P by 97% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.00 | 1.51 |
| Recency | 2 September 2014 | 1 June 2016 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 4 |
| Threads | 8 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 125 Watt | 15 Watt |
FX-8370 has a 164.9% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
A10-9600P, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 733.3% lower power consumption.
The FX-8370 is our recommended choice as it beats the A10-9600P in performance tests.
Note that FX-8370 is a desktop processor while A10-9600P is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8370 and A10-9600P, 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.
