Phenom II X4 650T vs Ryzen 7 8700G
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 7 8700G and Phenom II X4 650T processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 284 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 47.21 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | 29.10 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Phoenix (2023−2024) | Zosma (2010−2011) |
| Release date | 8 January 2024 (less than a year ago) | 1 July 2011 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $329 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 7 8700G and Phenom II X4 650T 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 | 4.2 GHz | 2.7 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 5.1 GHz | 3.2 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 16 MB (shared) | 4 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 178 mm2 | 346 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 95 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 25,000 million | 904 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 7 8700G and Phenom II X4 650T 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 | AM5 | AM3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 7 8700G and Phenom II X4 650T. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AES, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, BMI1, BMI2, SHA, F16C, FMA3, NX-Bit, AMD64, EVP, AMD-V, SMAP, SMEP, SMT, Precision Boost 2, XDNA2 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| Precision Boost 2 | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 7 8700G and Phenom II X4 650T are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 7 8700G and Phenom II X4 650T. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5 | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon 780M | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 7 8700G and Phenom II X4 650T.
| PCIe version | 4.0 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 20 | no data |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 8 January 2024 | 1 July 2011 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 4 |
| Threads | 16 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 4 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 95 Watt |
Ryzen 7 8700G has an age advantage of 12 years, 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 1025% more advanced lithography process, and 46.2% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Ryzen 7 8700G and Phenom II X4 650T. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 7 8700G and Phenom II X4 650T, 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.
