Phenom II X3 N870 vs Phenom II X4 P920
Aggregate performance score
Phenom II X3 N870 outperforms Phenom II X4 P920 by a significant 24% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Phenom II X4 P920 and Phenom II X3 N870 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2554 | 2414 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | 4x AMD Phenom II | 3x AMD Phenom II |
| Power efficiency | 3.25 | 2.87 |
| Architecture codename | Champlain (2010−2011) | Champlain (2010−2011) |
| Release date | 12 May 2010 (14 years ago) | 16 December 2010 (13 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Phenom II X4 P920 and Phenom II X3 N870 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) | 3 (Tri-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 3 |
| Boost clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 2.3 GHz |
| Bus rate | 3600 MHz | 3600 MHz |
| L1 cache | 512 KB | 384 KB |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 1.5 MB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom II X4 P920 and Phenom II X3 N870 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.
| Socket | S1 (S1g4) | S1 (S1g4) |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X4 P920 and Phenom II X3 N870. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, 3DNow, SSE (1,2,3,4A), AMD64, Enhanced Virus Protection, Virtualization, HyperTransport 3.0 | 86x MMX(+), 3DNow!(+), SSE(1,2,3,4A),-64, AMD-V |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom II X4 P920 and Phenom II X3 N870 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom II X4 P920 and Phenom II X3 N870. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.89 | 1.10 |
| Recency | 12 May 2010 | 16 December 2010 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 3 |
| Threads | 4 | 3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 35 Watt |
Phenom II X4 P920 has 33.3% more physical cores and 33.3% more threads, and 40% lower power consumption.
Phenom II X3 N870, on the other hand, has a 23.6% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 7 months.
The Phenom II X3 N870 is our recommended choice as it beats the Phenom II X4 P920 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X4 P920 and Phenom II X3 N870, 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.
