Phenom II X4 960T BE vs Ryzen 3 2200G
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 3 2200G and Phenom II X4 960T BE processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1379 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 8.79 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD Ryzen 3 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 6.19 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Raven Ridge (2017−2018) | Zosma (2010−2011) |
| Release date | 12 February 2018 (6 years ago) | 1 June 2010 (14 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $99 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 3 2200G and Phenom II X4 960T BE 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 | 3.5 GHz | 3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.7 GHz | 3.4 GHz |
| Multiplier | 35 | no data |
| L1 cache | 128K (per core) | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 210 mm2 | 346 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 4,950 million | 904 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 3 2200G and Phenom II X4 960T BE 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 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | AM4 | AM3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 3 2200G and Phenom II X4 960T BE. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | XFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMT | no data |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 3 2200G and Phenom II X4 960T BE are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 3 2200G and Phenom II X4 960T BE. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Dual-channel | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 46.933 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000) ( - 1100 MHz) | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 3 2200G and Phenom II X4 960T BE.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 12 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 12 February 2018 | 1 June 2010 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 95 Watt |
Ryzen 3 2200G has an age advantage of 7 years, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 46.2% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Ryzen 3 2200G and Phenom II X4 960T BE. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 3 2200G and Phenom II X4 960T BE, 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.
