Ultra 7 265KF vs FX-9800P

VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-9800P
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
1.66
Core Ultra 7 265KF
2024
20 cores / 20 threads, 125 Watt
40.49
+2339%

Core Ultra 7 265KF outperforms FX-9800P by a whopping 2339% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-9800P and Core Ultra 7 265KF processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking208672
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data100.00
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Bristol Ridgeno data
Power efficiency10.0929.54
Architecture codenameBristol Ridge (2016−2019)Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)
Release date31 May 2016 (8 years ago)24 October 2024 (recently)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$379

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

FX-9800P and Core Ultra 7 265KF 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)20 (Icosa-Core)
Threads420
Base clock speed2.7 GHz3.9 GHz
Boost clock speed3.6 GHz5.5 GHz
L1 cache320 KB112 KB (per core)
L2 cache1 MB (per module)3 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data30 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm3 nm
Die size250 mm2243 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Number of transistors3,100 million17,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on FX-9800P and Core Ultra 7 265KF 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
SocketFP41851
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-9800P and Core Ultra 7 265KF. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
FMA+-
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
TSX-+

Security technologies

FX-9800P and Core Ultra 7 265KF technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-9800P and Core Ultra 7 265KF are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-9800P and Core Ultra 7 265KF. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge)N/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-9800P and Core Ultra 7 265KF.

PCIe version3.05.0
PCI Express lanes820

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-9800P 1.66
Ultra 7 265KF 40.49
+2339%

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-9800P 2543
Ultra 7 265KF 61964
+2337%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.66 40.49
Recency 31 May 2016 24 October 2024
Physical cores 4 20
Threads 4 20
Chip lithography 28 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 125 Watt

FX-9800P has 733.3% lower power consumption.

Ultra 7 265KF, on the other hand, has a 2339.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, 400% more physical cores and 400% more threads, and a 833.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Core Ultra 7 265KF is our recommended choice as it beats the FX-9800P in performance tests.

Be aware that FX-9800P is a notebook processor while Core Ultra 7 265KF is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-9800P and Core Ultra 7 265KF, 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-9800P
FX-9800P
Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF
Core Ultra 7 265KF

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.


3.1 44 votes

Rate FX-9800P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 6 votes

Rate Core Ultra 7 265KF on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-9800P or Core Ultra 7 265KF, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.