Phenom X4 9850B vs Pentium G620

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Pentium G620
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.79
Phenom X4 9850B
2008
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.26
+59.5%

Phenom X4 9850B outperforms Pentium G620 by an impressive 59% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Pentium G620 and Phenom X4 9850B processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance ranking26082278
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation7.43no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Architecture codenameSandy Bridge (2011−2013)Agena (2007−2008)
Release date22 May 2011 (13 years ago)August 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$60no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Pentium G620 and Phenom X4 9850B 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 cores2 (Dual-core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads24
Base clock speed2.6 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2.6 GHz2.5 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)128 KB (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)512 KB (per core)
L3 cache3 MB (shared)2 MB (shared)
Chip lithography32 nm65 nm
Die size131 mm2285 mm2
Maximum core temperature69 °Cno data
Number of transistors504 million450 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Pentium G620 and Phenom X4 9850B 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 configuration11
SocketFCLGA1155AM2+
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Pentium G620 and Phenom X4 9850B. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2no data
AES-NI+-
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
StatusDiscontinuedno data

Security technologies

Pentium G620 and Phenom X4 9850B technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Pentium G620 and Phenom X4 9850B are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d-no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Pentium G620 and Phenom X4 9850B. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data
Maximum memory size32 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth17 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for 2nd Generation Intel® Processorsno data
Graphics max frequency1.1 GHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Pentium G620 and Phenom X4 9850B integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Pentium G620 and Phenom X4 9850B.

PCIe version2.0no data

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.

Pentium G620 0.79
Phenom X4 9850B 1.26
+59.5%

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.

Pentium G620 1211
Phenom X4 9850B 1946
+60.7%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.79 1.26
Physical cores 2 4
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 32 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 95 Watt

Pentium G620 has a 103.1% more advanced lithography process, and 46.2% lower power consumption.

Phenom X4 9850B, on the other hand, has a 59.5% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

The Phenom X4 9850B is our recommended choice as it beats the Pentium G620 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Pentium G620 and Phenom X4 9850B, 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.


Intel Pentium G620
Pentium G620
AMD Phenom X4 9850B
Phenom X4 9850B

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.


2.9 496 votes

Rate Pentium G620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 20 votes

Rate Phenom X4 9850B on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Pentium G620 or Phenom X4 9850B, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.