Phenom II X2 550 vs Phenom X3 8450
Aggregated performance score
Phenom X3 8450 outperforms Phenom II X2 550 by 4% based on our aggregated benchmark results.
General info
Comparing Phenom X3 8450 and Phenom II X2 550 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2491 | 2527 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Value for money | 4.29 | 3.55 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Architecture codename | Toliman (2008) | Callisto (2009−2010) |
| Release date | April 2008 (16 years old) | November 2009 (14 years old) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $133 |
| Current price | $13.48 | $26 (0.2x MSRP) |
Value for money
Performance per price, higher is better.
Phenom X3 8450 has 21% better value for money than Phenom II X2 550.
Technical specs
Phenom X3 8450 and Phenom II X2 550 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 | 3 (Tri-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 3 | 2 |
| Boost clock speed | 2.1 GHz | 3.1 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 2 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 285 mm2 | 258 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 450 million | 758 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom X3 8450 and Phenom II X2 550 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 | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | AM2+ | AM3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 80 Watt |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom X3 8450 and Phenom II X2 550 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom X3 8450 and Phenom II X2 550. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | 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.
Phenom X3 8450 outperforms Phenom II X2 550 by 4% based on our aggregated 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%
Phenom X3 8450 outperforms Phenom II X2 550 by 5% in Passmark.
Advantages and disadvantages
| Performance score | 0.79 | 0.76 |
| Physical cores | 3 | 2 |
| Threads | 3 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 80 Watt |
We couldn't decide between Phenom X3 8450 and Phenom II X2 550. The differences in performance seem too small.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom X3 8450 and Phenom II X2 550, 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.
