Athlon X4 950 vs Ryzen 7 PRO 1700X
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 7 PRO 1700X outperforms Athlon X4 950 by a whopping 335% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Ryzen 7 PRO 1700X and Athlon X4 950 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 714 | 1718 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 10.68 | 3.66 |
| Market segment | Server | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD Ryzen 7 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Zen (2017−2020) | Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) |
| Release date | 29 June 2017 (7 years ago) | 27 July 2017 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $60 |
| Current price | $236 | $43 (0.7x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Ryzen 7 PRO 1700X has 192% better value for money than Athlon X4 950.
Detailed specifications
Ryzen 7 PRO 1700X and Athlon X4 950 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 | 3.4 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 3.8 GHz |
| Bus support | 4 × 8 GT/s | no data |
| L1 cache | 96K (per core) | 128 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 16 MB (shared) | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Die size | 192 mm2 | 246 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 74 °C |
| Number of transistors | 4,800 million | 1,178 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | Yes | Yes |
Compatibility
Information on Ryzen 7 PRO 1700X and Athlon X4 950 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 | AM4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 1700X and Athlon X4 950. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | no data | + |
| AVX | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 1700X and Athlon X4 950 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 1700X and Athlon X4 950. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 Dual-channel | DDR4 Dual-channel |
| 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 | + | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 7 PRO 1700X and Athlon X4 950.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 20 | no 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 7 PRO 1700X outperforms Athlon X4 950 by 335% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Ryzen 7 PRO 1700X outperforms Athlon X4 950 by 334% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Ryzen 7 PRO 1700X outperforms Athlon X4 950 by 65% in GeekBench 5 Single-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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Ryzen 7 PRO 1700X outperforms Athlon X4 950 by 244% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 10.09 | 2.32 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 4 |
| Threads | 16 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 65 Watt |
The Ryzen 7 PRO 1700X is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon X4 950 in performance tests.
Be aware that Ryzen 7 PRO 1700X is a server/workstation processor while Athlon X4 950 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 7 PRO 1700X and Athlon X4 950, 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.
