Ultra 7 265F vs A12-9800E
Primary details
Comparing A12-9800E and Core Ultra 7 265F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1847 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.88 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | 5.89 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) | Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) |
| Release date | 27 July 2017 (7 years ago) | January 2025 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $105 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
A12-9800E and Core Ultra 7 265F 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) | 20 (Icosa-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 20 |
| Base clock speed | 3.1 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.8 GHz | 5.3 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 112 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 2048 KB | 3 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 30 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 3 nm |
| Die size | 246 mm2 | 243 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 74 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,178 million | 17,800 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on A12-9800E and Core Ultra 7 265F 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 | AM4 | 1851 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A12-9800E and Core Ultra 7 265F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | + |
| FRTC | + | - |
| FreeSync | + | - |
| PowerTune | + | - |
| TrueAudio | + | - |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| PowerGating | + | - |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| TSX | - | + |
Security technologies
A12-9800E and Core Ultra 7 265F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A12-9800E and Core Ultra 7 265F are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A12-9800E and Core Ultra 7 265F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4-2400 | DDR5 |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon R7 Graphics | N/A |
| iGPU core count | 8 | no data |
| Enduro | + | - |
| UVD | + | - |
| VCE | + | - |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of A12-9800E and Core Ultra 7 265F integrated GPUs.
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by A12-9800E and Core Ultra 7 265F integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | DirectX® 12 | no data |
| Vulkan | + | - |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A12-9800E and Core Ultra 7 265F.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 8 | 20 |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 4 | 20 |
| Threads | 4 | 20 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 3 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 65 Watt |
A12-9800E has 85.7% lower power consumption.
Ultra 7 265F, on the other hand, has 400% more physical cores and 400% more threads, and a 833.3% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between A12-9800E and Core Ultra 7 265F. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between A12-9800E and Core Ultra 7 265F, 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.
