Athlon X4 870K vs Pentium Gold G6405

VS

Aggregate performance score

Pentium Gold G6405
2021
2 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
2.67
+24.2%
Athlon X4 870K
2015
4 cores / 4 threads, 95 Watt
2.15

Pentium Gold G6405 outperforms Athlon X4 870K by a significant 24% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Pentium Gold G6405 and Athlon X4 870K processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking17221865
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency4.362.14
Architecture codenameComet Lake-R (2021)Godaveri (2014−2016)
Release date16 March 2021 (3 years ago)December 2015 (9 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$64no data

Detailed specifications

Pentium Gold G6405 and Athlon X4 870K 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 cores2 (Dual-core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed4.1 GHz3.9 GHz
Boost clock speed4.1 GHz4.1 GHz
Bus rate8 GT/sno data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)256K
L2 cache256 KB (per core)4 MB
L3 cache4 MB (shared)no data
Chip lithography14 nm28 nm
Die sizeno data245 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)72 °C72 °C
Number of transistorsno data2,411 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on Pentium Gold G6405 and Athlon X4 870K 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
Socket1200FM2+
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt95 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Pentium Gold G6405 and Athlon X4 870K. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX++
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
TSX+-

Security technologies

Pentium Gold G6405 and Athlon X4 870K technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Pentium Gold G6405 and Athlon X4 870K 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 Pentium Gold G6405 and Athlon X4 870K. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4-2666DDR3-2133

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel UHD Graphics 610no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Pentium Gold G6405 and Athlon X4 870K.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes1616

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.

Pentium Gold G6405 2.67
+24.2%
Athlon X4 870K 2.15

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.

Pentium Gold G6405 4244
+24.5%
Athlon X4 870K 3410

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.

Pentium Gold G6405 845
+81.7%
Athlon X4 870K 465

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.

Pentium Gold G6405 1726
+44%
Athlon X4 870K 1199

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.67 2.15
Physical cores 2 4
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 95 Watt

Pentium Gold G6405 has a 24.2% higher aggregate performance score, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 533.3% lower power consumption.

Athlon X4 870K, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores.

The Pentium Gold G6405 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon X4 870K in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Pentium Gold G6405 and Athlon X4 870K, 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.


Intel Pentium Gold G6405
Pentium Gold G6405
AMD Athlon X4 870K
Athlon X4 870K

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.


3.8 361 vote

Rate Pentium Gold G6405 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 76 votes

Rate Athlon X4 870K on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Pentium Gold G6405 or Athlon X4 870K, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.