Turion II Neo K625 vs Phenom X4 9550
Primary details
Comparing Phenom X4 9550 and Turion II Neo K625 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2425 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | AMD Turion II Neo |
| Power efficiency | 1.04 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Agena (2007−2008) | Geneva (2010) |
| Release date | March 2008 (16 years ago) | 12 May 2010 (14 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Phenom X4 9550 and Turion II Neo K625 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Boost clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 1.5 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 3200 MHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 2 MB (shared) | no data |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 285 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 450 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom X4 9550 and Turion II Neo K625 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 | no data |
| Socket | AM2+ | S1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 15 Watt |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom X4 9550 and Turion II Neo K625 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
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
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 15 Watt |
Phenom X4 9550 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
Turion II Neo K625, on the other hand, has a 44.4% more advanced lithography process, and 533.3% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Phenom X4 9550 and Turion II Neo K625. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Phenom X4 9550 is a desktop processor while Turion II Neo K625 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom X4 9550 and Turion II Neo K625, 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.
