PRO A10-9700 vs FX-8350

VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-8350
2012
8 cores / 8 threads, 125 Watt
3.81
+62.8%
PRO A10-9700
2017
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
2.34

FX-8350 outperforms PRO A10-9700 by an impressive 63% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-8350 and PRO A10-9700 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking14751801
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.77no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesAMD FX-Series (Desktop)no data
Power efficiency2.833.34
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date23 October 2012 (12 years ago)27 July 2017 (7 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$199no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

FX-8350 and PRO A10-9700 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 cores8 (Octa-Core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads84
Base clock speed4 GHz3.5 GHz
Boost clock speed4.2 GHz3.8 GHz
L2 cache8192 KB2048 KB
Chip lithography32 nm28 nm
Die size315 mm2250 mm2
Maximum core temperature61 °C90 °C
Number of transistors1,200 million3,100 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier+-
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.2 V - Max: 1.4 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-8350 and PRO A10-9700 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
SocketAM3+AM4
Power consumption (TDP)125 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8350 and PRO A10-9700. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4a, AMD64, AMD-V, AES, AVX, CLMUL, CVT16, EVP, FMA4, XOP, Turbo Core, HT3.1no data
AES-NI++
FMA++
AVX++
FRTC-+
FreeSync-+
PowerTune-+
TrueAudio-+
PowerNow-+
PowerGating-+
Out-of-band client management-+
VirusProtect-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-8350 and PRO A10-9700 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-8350 and PRO A10-9700. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4-2400
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)AMD Radeon R7 Graphics
iGPU core countno data6
Enduro-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of FX-8350 and PRO A10-9700 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by FX-8350 and PRO A10-9700 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8350 and PRO A10-9700.

PCIe versionn/a3.0
PCI Express lanesno data8

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.

FX-8350 3.81
+62.8%
PRO A10-9700 2.34

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.

FX-8350 5936
+62.5%
PRO A10-9700 3652

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 3.81 2.34
Recency 23 October 2012 27 July 2017
Physical cores 8 4
Threads 8 4
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 125 Watt 65 Watt

FX-8350 has a 62.8% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

PRO A10-9700, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 92.3% lower power consumption.

The FX-8350 is our recommended choice as it beats the PRO A10-9700 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8350 and PRO A10-9700, 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 FX-8350
FX-8350
AMD PRO A10-9700
PRO A10-9700

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.


4.2 3676 votes

Rate FX-8350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.5 4 votes

Rate PRO A10-9700 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-8350 or PRO A10-9700, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.