FX-4150 vs FX-9830P
Aggregated performance score
Primary details
Comparing FX-9830P and FX-4150 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1761 | 1756 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 2.47 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD Bristol Ridge | no data |
| Architecture codename | Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) | Zambezi (2011−2012) |
| Release date | 1 June 2016 (7 years ago) | 23 October 2012 (11 years ago) |
| Current price | $749 | $90 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
FX-9830P and FX-4150 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 3 GHz | 3.8 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 4 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 192 KB |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 4 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 8 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 250 mm2 | 315 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 3100 Million | 1,200 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | Yes |
Compatibility
Information on FX-9830P and FX-4150 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 | no data | 1 |
| Socket | no data | AM3+ |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25-45 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-9830P and FX-4150. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Dual-Channel DDR3/DDR4-1866 Memory Controller, PCIe 3.0 x8 | no data |
| AES-NI | no data | + |
| FMA | no data | + |
| AVX | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-9830P and FX-4150 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-9830P and FX-4150. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3, DDR4 | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge) | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-9830P and FX-4150.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
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.
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-4150 outperforms FX-9830P by 1% in Passmark.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.14 | 2.15 |
| Recency | 1 June 2016 | 23 October 2012 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 95 Watt |
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between FX-9830P and FX-4150.
Be aware that FX-9830P is a notebook processor while FX-4150 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between FX-9830P and FX-4150, 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.
