Athlon XP-M 2500+ vs Phenom X4 9650
Primary details
Comparing Phenom X4 9650 and Athlon XP-M 2500+ processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2449 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Power efficiency | 1.09 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Agena (2007−2008) | Barton (2001−2004) |
| Release date | March 2008 (16 years ago) | January 2001 (24 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Phenom X4 9650 and Athlon XP-M 2500+ 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Boost clock speed | 2.3 GHz | 1.86 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 2 MB (shared) | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 130 nm |
| Die size | 285 mm2 | 101 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 450 million | 63 million |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom X4 9650 and Athlon XP-M 2500+ 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+ | A |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 45 Watt |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom X4 9650 and Athlon XP-M 2500+ are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 4 | 1 |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 45 Watt |
Phenom X4 9650 has 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 100% more advanced lithography process.
Athlon XP-M 2500+, on the other hand, has 111.1% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Phenom X4 9650 and Athlon XP-M 2500+. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Phenom X4 9650 is a desktop processor while Athlon XP-M 2500+ is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom X4 9650 and Athlon XP-M 2500+, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
