A10-5700 vs FX-9830P

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-9830P
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 25 Watt
2.14
+20.9%

FX-9830P outperforms A10-5700 by a significant 21% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-9830P and A10-5700 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking17871933
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.48
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Bristol Ridgeno data
Architecture codenameBristol Ridge (2016−2019)Trinity (2012−2013)
Release date1 June 2016 (8 years ago)2 October 2012 (11 years ago)
Current price$749 $48

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

FX-9830P and A10-5700 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 speed3 GHz3.4 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz4 GHz
L1 cacheno data128 KB (per core)
L2 cache2 MB1 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography28 nm32 nm
Die size250 mm2246 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data71 °C
Number of transistors3100 Million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on FX-9830P and A10-5700 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 configurationno data1
Socketno dataFM2
Power consumption (TDP)25-45 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-9830P and A10-5700. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsDual-Channel DDR3/DDR4-1866 Memory Controller, PCIe 3.0 x8no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-9830P and A10-5700 are enumerated here.

AMD-Vno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-9830P and A10-5700. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge)AMD Radeon HD 7660D

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-9830P 2.14
+20.9%
A10-5700 1.77

FX-9830P outperforms A10-5700 by 21% 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-9830P 3307
+21%
A10-5700 2734

FX-9830P outperforms A10-5700 by 21% 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-9830P 609
+57.4%
A10-5700 387

FX-9830P outperforms A10-5700 by 57% 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-9830P 1526
+57.3%
A10-5700 970

FX-9830P outperforms A10-5700 by 57% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.14 1.77
Integrated graphics card 1.95 1.30
Recency 1 June 2016 2 October 2012
Chip lithography 28 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 65 Watt

The FX-9830P is our recommended choice as it beats the A10-5700 in performance tests.

Be aware that FX-9830P is a notebook processor while A10-5700 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-9830P and A10-5700, 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-9830P
FX-9830P
AMD A10-5700
A10-5700

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.


3.6 108 votes

Rate FX-9830P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 160 votes

Rate A10-5700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-9830P or A10-5700, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.