A4-6210 vs FX-9800P

VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-9800P
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
1.63
+69.8%
A4-6210
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
0.96

FX-9800P outperforms A4-6210 by an impressive 70% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-9800P and A4-6210 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking20892506
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Bristol RidgeAMD A-Series
Power efficiency10.095.94
Architecture codenameBristol Ridge (2016−2019)Beema (2014)
Release date31 May 2016 (8 years ago)29 April 2014 (10 years ago)

Detailed specifications

FX-9800P and A4-6210 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 speed2.7 GHzno data
Boost clock speed3.6 GHz1.8 GHz
L1 cache320 KBno data
L2 cache1 MB (per module)2048 KB
Chip lithography28 nm28 nm
Die size250 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Number of transistors3,100 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on FX-9800P and A4-6210 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 configuration1no data
SocketFP4FT3b
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-9800P and A4-6210. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno data86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX
AES-NI++
FMA+FMA4
AVX++
PowerNow-+
PowerGating-+
VirusProtect-+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-9800P and A4-6210 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++
IOMMU 2.0-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-9800P and A4-6210. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR3-1599
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge)AMD Radeon R3 Graphics
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of FX-9800P and A4-6210 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by FX-9800P and A4-6210 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-9800P and A4-6210.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanes8no 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.

FX-9800P 1.63
+69.8%
A4-6210 0.96

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-9800P 2543
+70.3%
A4-6210 1493

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.

FX-9800P 496
+162%
A4-6210 189

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.

FX-9800P 1119
+110%
A4-6210 532

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

FX-9800P 14.4
+136%
A4-6210 34.05

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

FX-9800P 3
+63.4%
A4-6210 2

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

FX-9800P 236
+75.5%
A4-6210 135

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

FX-9800P 74
+97.3%
A4-6210 38

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

FX-9800P 0.91
+97.8%
A4-6210 0.46

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.63 0.96
Recency 31 May 2016 29 April 2014

FX-9800P has a 69.8% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 2 years.

The FX-9800P is our recommended choice as it beats the A4-6210 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-9800P and A4-6210, 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-9800P
FX-9800P
AMD A4-6210
A4-6210

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.


3.1 44 votes

Rate FX-9800P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.1 152 votes

Rate A4-6210 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-9800P or A4-6210, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.