i5-L16G7 vs Phenom II X4 910e
Aggregate performance score
Core i5-L16G7 outperforms Phenom II X4 910e by an impressive 59% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Phenom II X4 910e and Core i5-L16G7 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2244 | 1858 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.09 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Ice Lake |
| Power efficiency | 1.95 | 28.80 |
| Architecture codename | Deneb (2009−2011) | Lakefield (2020) |
| Release date | 25 January 2010 (14 years ago) | June 2020 (4 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $157 | $281 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Phenom II X4 910e and Core i5-L16G7 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 5 (Penta-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 5 |
| Base clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 1.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 3 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 GT/s |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 80 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 4 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 258 mm2 | 82 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 758 million | 4,050 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom II X4 910e and Core i5-L16G7 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 | FC-CSP1016 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 7 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X4 910e and Core i5-L16G7. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2 |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Speed Shift | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | 2.0 |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| TSX | - | + |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Max 3.0 | no data | + |
Security technologies
Phenom II X4 910e and Core i5-L16G7 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Boot | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| SGX | no data | - |
| OS Guard | no data | + |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom II X4 910e and Core i5-L16G7 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom II X4 910e and Core i5-L16G7. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | LPDDR4X-4267 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 8 GB |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 34 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel UHD Graphics |
| Quick Sync Video | - | + |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 500 MHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 64 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Phenom II X4 910e and Core i5-L16G7 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 4 |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Phenom II X4 910e and Core i5-L16G7 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | no data | + |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Phenom II X4 910e and Core i5-L16G7 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | no data | DX12 |
| OpenGL | no data | OpenGL4.5 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Phenom II X4 910e and Core i5-L16G7.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 6 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.34 | 2.13 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 5 |
| Threads | 4 | 5 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 7 Watt |
i5-L16G7 has a 59% higher aggregate performance score, 25% more physical cores and 25% more threads, a 350% more advanced lithography process, and 828.6% lower power consumption.
The Core i5-L16G7 is our recommended choice as it beats the Phenom II X4 910e in performance tests.
Note that Phenom II X4 910e is a desktop processor while Core i5-L16G7 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X4 910e and Core i5-L16G7, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
