Pentium G3220 vs Phenom II X4 925

VS

Aggregate performance score

Phenom II X4 925
2009
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
1.43
+20.2%
Pentium G3220
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 54 Watt
1.19

Phenom II X4 925 outperforms Pentium G3220 by a significant 20% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Phenom II X4 925 and Pentium G3220 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22012361
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.150.13
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.422.09
Architecture codenameDeneb (2009−2011)Haswell (2013−2015)
Release date11 May 2009 (15 years ago)1 September 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$160$71

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Phenom II X4 925 has 15% better value for money than Pentium G3220.

Detailed specifications

Phenom II X4 925 and Pentium G3220 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed2.8 GHz3 GHz
Boost clock speed2.8 GHz3 GHz
Bus rateno data5 GT/s
L1 cache128 KB (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache512 KB (per core)256 KB (per core)
L3 cache6 MB (shared)3 MB (shared)
Chip lithography45 nm22 nm
Die size258 mm2177 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data72 °C
Number of transistors758 million1,400 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Phenom II X4 925 and Pentium G3220 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
SocketAM31150
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt54 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X4 925 and Pentium G3220. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom II X4 925 and Pentium G3220 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom II X4 925 and Pentium G3220. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)Intel HD (Haswell)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Phenom II X4 925 and Pentium G3220.

PCIe version2.03.0

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.

Phenom II X4 925 1.43
+20.2%
Pentium G3220 1.19

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.

Phenom II X4 925 2272
+20.3%
Pentium G3220 1889

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.

Phenom II X4 925 323
Pentium G3220 531
+64.4%

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.

Phenom II X4 925 975
+9.2%
Pentium G3220 893

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.43 1.19
Recency 11 May 2009 1 September 2013
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 45 nm 22 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 54 Watt

Phenom II X4 925 has a 20.2% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

Pentium G3220, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 104.5% more advanced lithography process, and 75.9% lower power consumption.

The Phenom II X4 925 is our recommended choice as it beats the Pentium G3220 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X4 925 and Pentium G3220, 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 Phenom II X4 925
Phenom II X4 925
Intel Pentium G3220
Pentium G3220

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.


3.9 327 votes

Rate Phenom II X4 925 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 358 votes

Rate Pentium G3220 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Phenom II X4 925 or Pentium G3220, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.