Athlon XP 3000+ vs Phenom X4 9650

Primary details

Comparing Phenom X4 9650 and Athlon XP 3000+ processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2396not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.08no data
Architecture codenameAgena (2007−2008)Barton (2001−2004)
Release dateMarch 2008 (16 years ago)January 2001 (23 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$78

Detailed specifications

Phenom X4 9650 and Athlon XP 3000+ 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)1 (Single-Core)
Threads41
Boost clock speed2.3 GHz2.17 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)128 KB
L2 cache512 KB (per core)512 KB
L3 cache2 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography65 nm130 nm
Die size285 mm2101 mm2
Number of transistors450 million63 million
64 bit support+-
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Phenom X4 9650 and Athlon XP 3000+ 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
SocketAM2+A
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt68 Watt

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom X4 9650 and Athlon XP 3000+ are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.



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 X4 9650 1721
+557%
Athlon XP 3000+ 262

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 4 1
Threads 4 1
Chip lithography 65 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 68 Watt

Phenom X4 9650 has 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.

Athlon XP 3000+, on the other hand, has 39.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Phenom X4 9650 and Athlon XP 3000+. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom X4 9650 and Athlon XP 3000+, 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 X4 9650
Phenom X4 9650
AMD Athlon XP 3000+
Athlon XP 3000+

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.


3.8 223 votes

Rate Phenom X4 9650 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 25 votes

Rate Athlon XP 3000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Phenom X4 9650 or Athlon XP 3000+, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.