FX-4170 vs A8-6600K

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

A8-6600K
2013
4 cores / 4 threads, 100 Watt
1.89
FX-4170
2012
4 cores / 4 threads, 125 Watt
1.91
+1.1%

FX-4170 outperforms A8-6600K by a minimal 1% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing A8-6600K and FX-4170 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking19641958
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.23no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesAMD A-Series (Desktop)no data
Power efficiency1.791.45
Architecture codenameRichland (2013−2014)Zambezi (2011−2012)
Release date1 June 2013 (11 years ago)27 February 2012 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$142no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

A8-6600K and FX-4170 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed3.9 GHz4.2 GHz
Boost clock speed4.2 GHz4.3 GHz
L1 cache192 KB192 KB
L2 cache4096 KB4096 KB
L3 cache0 KB8192 KB
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size246 mm2315 mm2
Maximum core temperature74 °C61 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)74 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,178 million1,200 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-
P0 Vcore voltageno dataMin: 1.1875 V - Max: 1.4125 V

Compatibility

Information on A8-6600K and FX-4170 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 configuration11
SocketFM2AM3+
Power consumption (TDP)100 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by A8-6600K and FX-4170. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
FMAFMA4+
AVXAVX+
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
VirusProtect+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by A8-6600K and FX-4170 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by A8-6600K and FX-4170. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1866DDR3
Max memory channels2no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon HD 8570Dno data
Number of pipelines256no data
Enduro+-
Switchable graphics+-
UVD+-
VCE+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of A8-6600K and FX-4170 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by A8-6600K and FX-4170 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 11no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by A8-6600K and FX-4170.

PCIe version2.0n/a

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.

A8-6600K 1.89
FX-4170 1.91
+1.1%

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.

A8-6600K 3007
FX-4170 3034
+0.9%

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.

A8-6600K 451
FX-4170 464
+2.9%

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.

A8-6600K 1083
FX-4170 1201
+10.9%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.89 1.91
Recency 1 June 2013 27 February 2012
Power consumption (TDP) 100 Watt 125 Watt

A8-6600K has an age advantage of 1 year, and 25% lower power consumption.

FX-4170, on the other hand, has a 1.1% higher aggregate performance score.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between A8-6600K and FX-4170.


Should you still have questions on choice between A8-6600K and FX-4170, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD A8-6600K
A8-6600K
AMD FX-4170
FX-4170

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.9 446 votes

Rate A8-6600K on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.4 80 votes

Rate FX-4170 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about A8-6600K or FX-4170, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.