PRO A12-8870E vs FX-8350

Primary details

Comparing FX-8350 and PRO A12-8870E processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking	1475	1960
Place by popularity	not in top-100	not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation	0.76	no data
Market segment	Desktop processor	Desktop processor
Series	AMD FX-Series (Desktop)	no data
Power efficiency	2.83	5.14
Architecture codename	Vishera (2012−2015)	Carrizo (2015−2018)
Release date	23 October 2012 (12 years ago)	October 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)	$199	no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Detailed specifications

FX-8350 and PRO A12-8870E 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	8	4
Base clock speed	4 GHz	2.9 GHz
Boost clock speed	4.2 GHz	3.8 GHz
L2 cache	8192 KB	2048 KB
Chip lithography	32 nm	28 nm
Die size	315 mm2	250 mm2
Maximum core temperature	61 °C	no data
Number of transistors	1,200 million	3,100 million
64 bit support	+	+
Windows 11 compatibility	-	no data
Unlocked multiplier	+	-
P0 Vcore voltage	Min: 1.2 V - Max: 1.4 V	no data

Compatibility

Information on FX-8350 and PRO A12-8870E 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	AM3+	AM4
Power consumption (TDP)	125 Watt	35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-8350 and PRO A12-8870E. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions	MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, SSE4a, AMD64, AMD-V, AES, AVX, CLMUL, CVT16, EVP, FMA4, XOP, Turbo Core, HT3.1	no data
AES-NI	+	+
FMA	+	+
AVX	+	+
FRTC	-	+
FreeSync	-	+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-8350 and PRO A12-8870E are enumerated here.

AMD-V

+

+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-8350 and PRO A12-8870E. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory types	DDR3	DDR4-2400
Max memory channels	no data	2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card	On certain motherboards (Chipset feature)	AMD Radeon R7 Graphics
iGPU core count	no data	8
Enduro	-	n/a
Switchable graphics	-	+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of FX-8350 and PRO A12-8870E integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort

-

n/a

Graphics API support

APIs supported by FX-8350 and PRO A12-8870E integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX	no data	DirectX® 12
Vulkan	-	+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-8350 and PRO A12-8870E.

PCIe version

n/a

3.0

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.

---

Pros & cons summary

---

Performance score	3.74	1.90
Physical cores	8	4
Threads	8	4
Chip lithography	32 nm	28 nm
Power consumption (TDP)	125 Watt	35 Watt

---

Should you still have questions on choice between FX-8350 and PRO A12-8870E, 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.

---