FX-8170 vs Phenom X4 9650
Primary details
Comparing Phenom X4 9650 and FX-8170 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2404 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | 1.08 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Agena (2007−2008) | Zambezi (2011−2012) |
| Release date | March 2008 (16 years ago) | 23 October 2012 (12 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Phenom X4 9650 and FX-8170 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) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 8 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.9 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.3 GHz | 4.5 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 384 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 8 MB |
| L3 cache | 2 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 285 mm2 | 315 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 450 million | 1,200 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom X4 9650 and FX-8170 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 | AM2+ | AM3+ |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 125 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom X4 9650 and FX-8170. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| FMA | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom X4 9650 and FX-8170 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom X4 9650 and FX-8170. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Phenom X4 9650 and FX-8170.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 4 | 8 |
| Threads | 4 | 8 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 125 Watt |
Phenom X4 9650 has 31.6% lower power consumption.
FX-8170, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 103.1% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Phenom X4 9650 and FX-8170. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom X4 9650 and FX-8170, 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.
