Athlon II X4 605e vs Ryzen 7 1800X
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 7 1800X outperforms Athlon II X4 605e by a whopping 733% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 955 | 2600 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.64 | 0.18 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD Ryzen 7 | no data |
| Power efficiency | 10.44 | 2.64 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Manufacturer | GlobalFoundries | no data |
| Architecture codename | Zen (2017−2020) | Propus (2009−2011) |
| Release date | 22 February 2017 (8 years ago) | 20 October 2009 (16 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $499 | $102 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Ryzen 7 1800X has 1367% better value for money than Athlon II X4 605e.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 7 1800X and Athlon II X4 605e 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 | 8 (Octa-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 16 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 3.6 GHz | 2.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4 GHz | 2.3 GHz |
| Bus rate | 4 × 8 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 36 | no data |
| L1 cache | 768 KB | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 4096 KB | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 16384 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 213 mm2 | 169 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 4800 Million | 300 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 7 1800X and Athlon II X4 605e 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) | 95 Watt | 45 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 7 1800X and Athlon II X4 605e. 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 | FMA3 | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| XFR | + | - |
| SenseMI | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 7 1800X and Athlon II X4 605e are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 7 1800X and Athlon II X4 605e. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 42.671 GB/s | no 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 7 1800X and Athlon II X4 605e.
| PCIe version | n/a | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 20 | no data |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 9.25 | 1.11 |
| Recency | 22 February 2017 | 20 October 2009 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 4 |
| Threads | 16 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 45 Watt |
Ryzen 7 1800X has a 733.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.
Athlon II X4 605e, on the other hand, has 111.1% lower power consumption.
The AMD Ryzen 7 1800X is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Athlon II X4 605e in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
