Phenom II X4 925 vs Phenom II X4 X920 BE
Aggregate performance score
Phenom II X4 X920 BE outperforms Phenom II X4 925 by a minimal 2% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Phenom II X4 X920 BE and Phenom II X4 925 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2160 | 2180 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 0.11 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | 4x AMD Phenom II | no data |
| Power efficiency | 3.06 | 1.42 |
| Architecture codename | Champlain (2010−2011) | Deneb (2009−2011) |
| Release date | 12 May 2010 (14 years ago) | 11 May 2009 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $160 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Phenom II X4 X920 BE and Phenom II X4 925 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) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.8 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.3 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
| Bus rate | 3600 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 256 KB | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | no data | 258 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 758 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom II X4 X920 BE and Phenom II X4 925 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 | S1 | AM3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X4 X920 BE and Phenom II X4 925. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | HyperTransport 3.0, Enhanced Virus Protection, AMD64, SSE4A, unlocked multiplier | no data |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom II X4 X920 BE and Phenom II X4 925 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom II X4 X920 BE and Phenom II X4 925. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Phenom II X4 X920 BE and Phenom II X4 925.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.51 | 1.48 |
| Recency | 12 May 2010 | 11 May 2009 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 95 Watt |
Phenom II X4 X920 BE has a 2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 1 year, and 111.1% lower power consumption.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Phenom II X4 X920 BE and Phenom II X4 925.
Be aware that Phenom II X4 X920 BE is a notebook processor while Phenom II X4 925 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X4 X920 BE and Phenom II X4 925, 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.
