Phenom II X4 905e vs Ryzen 3 1200

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 3 1200
2017
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
4.03
+230%
Phenom II X4 905e
2009
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
1.22

Ryzen 3 1200 outperforms Phenom II X4 905e by a whopping 230% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 3 1200 and Phenom II X4 905e processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking14062320
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.090.05
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Ryzen 34x Phenom II (Desktop)
Power efficiency5.871.78
Architecture codenameSummit Ridge (Zen) (2017)Deneb (2009−2011)
Release date27 July 2017 (7 years ago)2 June 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$109$212

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 3 1200 has 8080% better value for money than Phenom II X4 905e.

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 3 1200 and Phenom II X4 905e 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)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed3.1 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed3.4 GHz2.5 GHz
Bus rate4 × 8 GT/sno data
Multiplier31no data
L1 cache96K (per core)128 KB (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)512 KB (per core)
L3 cache8 MB (shared)6 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm45 nm
Die size192 mm2258 mm2
Maximum core temperature95 °Cno data
Number of transistors4,800 million758 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 3 1200 and Phenom II X4 905e 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketAM4AM3
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 3 1200 and Phenom II X4 905e. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX (+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4A, AES, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, SHA45 nm, 1.25
AES-NI+-
AVX+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 3 1200 and Phenom II X4 905e are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 3 1200 and Phenom II X4 905e. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR3
Maximum memory size64 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth42.671 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card-On certain motherboards (Chipset feature)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 3 1200 and Phenom II X4 905e.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanes20no data

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.

Ryzen 3 1200 4.03
+230%
Phenom II X4 905e 1.22

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.

Ryzen 3 1200 6407
+231%
Phenom II X4 905e 1936

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Ryzen 3 1200 997
+192%
Phenom II X4 905e 341

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Ryzen 3 1200 2850
+148%
Phenom II X4 905e 1150

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Ryzen 3 1200 4178
+82.4%
Phenom II X4 905e 2290

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Ryzen 3 1200 13961
+69.4%
Phenom II X4 905e 8241

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Ryzen 3 1200 12.5
+20.8%
Phenom II X4 905e 15.1

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.

Ryzen 3 1200 6
+84.6%
Phenom II X4 905e 3

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Ryzen 3 1200 480
+88.2%
Phenom II X4 905e 255

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Ryzen 3 1200 135
+111%
Phenom II X4 905e 64

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Ryzen 3 1200 1.53
+101%
Phenom II X4 905e 0.76

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Ryzen 3 1200 2.6
+550%
Phenom II X4 905e 0.4

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Ryzen 3 1200 33
+94.3%
Phenom II X4 905e 17

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Ryzen 3 1200 160
+82.9%
Phenom II X4 905e 88

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Ryzen 3 1200 2481
+22.9%
Phenom II X4 905e 2018

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.03 1.22
Recency 27 July 2017 2 June 2009
Chip lithography 14 nm 45 nm

Ryzen 3 1200 has a 230.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Ryzen 3 1200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Phenom II X4 905e in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 3 1200 and Phenom II X4 905e, 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 Ryzen 3 1200
Ryzen 3 1200
AMD Phenom II X4 905e
Phenom II X4 905e

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.


3.9 2793 votes

Rate Ryzen 3 1200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 28 votes

Rate Phenom II X4 905e on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 3 1200 or Phenom II X4 905e, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.