Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U vs FX-9830P
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U outperforms FX-9830P by a whopping 283% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing FX-9830P and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1788 | 866 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Bristol Ridge | AMD Renoir (Ryzen 4000 APU) |
| Architecture codename | Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) | Renoir-U PRO (Zen 2) |
| Release date | 1 June 2016 (8 years ago) | 7 May 2020 (4 years ago) |
| Current price | $749 | no data |
Detailed specifications
FX-9830P and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U 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) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 3 GHz | 2.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 4 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 8 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 7 nm |
| Die size | 250 mm2 | 156 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | 3100 Million | 9,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on FX-9830P and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U 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 | FP6 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25-45 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-9830P and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U. 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 | DDR4-3200/LPDDR4-4266 RAM, PCIe 3, PRO, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME |
| AES-NI | no data | + |
| FMA | no data | + |
| AVX | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-9830P and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-9830P and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3, DDR4 | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 4 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 68.27 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | no data | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge) | AMD Radeon RX Vega 6 (Ryzen 4000/5000) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-9830P and Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
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.
Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U outperforms FX-9830P by 283% 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%
Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U outperforms FX-9830P by 284% 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%
Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U outperforms FX-9830P by 114% 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%
Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U outperforms FX-9830P by 202% 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%
Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U outperforms FX-9830P by 74% 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%
Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U outperforms FX-9830P by 181% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.
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%
Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U outperforms FX-9830P by 255% 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%
Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U outperforms FX-9830P by 286% 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%
Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U outperforms FX-9830P by 88% 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%
Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U outperforms FX-9830P by 84% 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%
Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U outperforms FX-9830P by 170% in TrueCrypt AES.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.14 | 8.20 |
| Integrated graphics card | 1.95 | 6.26 |
| Recency | 1 June 2016 | 7 May 2020 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 6 |
| Threads | 4 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 15 Watt |
The Ryzen 5 PRO 4650U 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 4650U, 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.
