Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U vs FX-9830P

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-9830P
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 25 Watt
2.14
Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U
2017
4 cores / 8 threads, 15 Watt
4.30
+101%

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U outperforms FX-9830P by a whopping 101% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-9830P and Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking17871295
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Bristol RidgeAMD Ryzen 5
Architecture codenameBristol Ridge (2016−2019)Raven Ridge (2017−2018)
Release date1 June 2016 (8 years ago)26 October 2017 (6 years ago)
Current price$749 $611

Detailed specifications

FX-9830P and Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 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)
Threads48
Base clock speed3 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz3.6 GHz
L1 cacheno data128K (per core)
L2 cache2 MB512K (per core)
L3 cacheno data4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm14 nm
Die size250 mm2246 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °C105 °C
Number of transistors3100 Million4500 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on FX-9830P and Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 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 (Uniprocessor)
Socketno dataFP5
Power consumption (TDP)25-45 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-9830P and Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsDual-Channel DDR3/DDR4-1866 Memory Controller, PCIe 3.0 x8XFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMT
AES-NIno data+
AVXno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-9830P and Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U are enumerated here.

AMD-Vno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-9830P and Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR4 Dual-channel
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data38.397 GB/s
ECC memory supportno data+

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge)AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-9830P and Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data12

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
Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 4.30
+101%

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U outperforms FX-9830P by 101% 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
Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 6654
+101%

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U outperforms FX-9830P by 101% 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
Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 887
+45.6%

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U outperforms FX-9830P by 46% 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
Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 2554
+67.4%

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U outperforms FX-9830P by 67% 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
Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 4349
+43.4%

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U outperforms FX-9830P by 43% 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
Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 14336
+46%

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U outperforms FX-9830P by 46% 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
+20.4%
Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 12.36

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U outperforms FX-9830P by 20% 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
Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 6
+67%

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U outperforms FX-9830P by 67% 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
Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 553
+83.7%

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U outperforms FX-9830P by 84% 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
Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 134
+44.1%

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U outperforms FX-9830P by 44% 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
Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 1.55
+40.9%

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U outperforms FX-9830P by 41% 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
Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U 3.4
+70%

Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U outperforms FX-9830P by 70% in TrueCrypt AES.

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.14 4.30
Integrated graphics card 1.95 4.50
Recency 1 June 2016 26 October 2017
Threads 4 8
Chip lithography 28 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 15 Watt

The Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U is our recommended choice as it beats the FX-9830P in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-9830P and Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U, 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 Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U
Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U

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
3.9 98 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-9830P or Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.