AMD A4-7210 vs FX-9830P

#ad
Buy
VS

Combined performance score

FX-9830P
2.15
+97.2%

FX-9830P outperforms A4-7210 by 97% in our combined benchmark results.

General info

Comparing FX-9830P and A4-7210 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking17362266
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Bristol RidgeAMD A-Series
Architecture codenameBristol Ridge (2016−2019)Carrizo-L (2015)
Release date1 June 2016 (7 years old)7 May 2015 (8 years old)
Current price$749 $177

Technical specs

FX-9830P and A4-7210 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 GHz1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz2.2 GHz
L2 cache2 MB2048 KB
Chip lithography28 nm28 nm
Die size250 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature90 °C90 °C
Number of transistors3100 Million930 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on FX-9830P and A4-7210 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.

Socketno dataFT3b
Power consumption (TDP)25-45 Watt12-25 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-9830P and A4-7210. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsDual-Channel DDR3/DDR4-1866 Memory Controller, PCIe 3.0 x8MMX, SSE4.2, AES, AVX, BMI1, F16C, AMD64, VT
AES-NIno data+
FMAno dataFMA4
AVXno data+
PowerTuneno data-
TrueAudiono data-
PowerNowno data+
PowerGatingno data+
Out-of-band client managementno data-
VirusProtectno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-9830P and A4-7210 are enumerated here.

AMD-Vno data1
IOMMU 2.0no data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-9830P and A4-7210. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR3L-1600
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge)AMD Radeon R3 Graphics
Endurono data+
Switchable graphicsno data1
UVDno data+
VCEno data+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of FX-9830P and A4-7210 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPortno data+
HDMIno data+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by FX-9830P and A4-7210 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkanno data1

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-9830P and A4-7210.

PCIe versionno data2.0

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 2.15
+97.2%
A4-7210 1.09

FX-9830P outperforms A4-7210 by 97% 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-9830P 3306
+98.2%
A4-7210 1668

FX-9830P outperforms A4-7210 by 98% 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
+185%
A4-7210 214

FX-9830P outperforms A4-7210 by 185% 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
+160%
A4-7210 588

FX-9830P outperforms A4-7210 by 160% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.

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-9830P 3033
+75.1%
A4-7210 1732

FX-9830P outperforms A4-7210 by 75% 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-9830P 9822
+75.6%
A4-7210 5593

FX-9830P outperforms A4-7210 by 76% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

FX-9830P 10.27
+162%
A4-7210 26.94

A4-7210 outperforms FX-9830P by 162% in wPrime 32.

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-9830P 4
+86.7%
A4-7210 2

FX-9830P outperforms A4-7210 by 87% 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-9830P 301
+91.7%
A4-7210 157

FX-9830P outperforms A4-7210 by 92% 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-9830P 93
+102%
A4-7210 46

FX-9830P outperforms A4-7210 by 102% 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-9830P 1.1
+96.4%
A4-7210 0.56

FX-9830P outperforms A4-7210 by 96% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

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-9830P 2
+66.7%
A4-7210 1.2

FX-9830P outperforms A4-7210 by 67% in TrueCrypt AES.

Gaming performance

Advantages and disadvantages


Performance score 2.15 1.09
Integrated graphics card 1.95
Recency 1 June 2016 7 May 2015
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 12 Watt

The FX-9830P is our recommended choice as it beats the A4-7210 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-9830P and A4-7210, 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-9830P
FX-9830P
AMD A4-7210
A4-7210

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.


3.6 107 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 134 votes

Rate AMD A4-7210 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions and comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-9830P or A4-7210, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.