CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 7650K vs 7850K among desktop CPUs

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

A8 7650K
8.0
A10 7850K
7.9
FX 8350
7.9
PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

A8 7650K
7.4
A10 7850K
7.5
FX 8350
7.5
PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics

A8 7650K
8.6
A10 7850K
10.0
FX 8350
0.0
Fire Strike

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing

A8 7650K
8.7
A10 7850K
9.2
FX 8350
0.0
CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?

A8 7650K
5.6
A10 7850K
6.1
FX 8350
5.1
Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

A8 7650K
7.3
A10 7850K
6.9
FX 8350
6.2
Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

8.7

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

A8 7650K
8.4
A10 7850K
8.7
FX 8350
5.7

Winner
AMD A10 7850K 

CPUBoss recommends the AMD A10 7850K  based on its performance, single-core performance and value.

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of AMD A8 7650K

Reasons to consider the
AMD A8 7650K

Report a correction
Newer Jan, 2015 vs Jan, 2014 Release date 11 months later
Front view of AMD A10 7850K

Reasons to consider the
AMD A10 7850K

Report a correction
Much better PassMark (Single core) score 1,568 vs 1,428 Around 10% better PassMark (Single core) score
Much better performance per watt 9.86 pt/W vs 3.25 pt/W More than 3x better performance per watt
Much better performance per dollar 5.57 pt/$ vs 3.43 pt/$ More than 60% better performance per dollar
Higher clock speed 3.7 GHz vs 3.3 GHz More than 10% higher clock speed
Much better cinebench r10 32Bit 1-core score 4,273 vs 3,936 Around 10% better cinebench r10 32Bit 1-core score
Lower typical power consumption 52.81W vs 77.19W More than 30% lower typical power consumption
Lower annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year vs 22.89 $/year More than 30% lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year vs 83.22 $/year More than 30% lower annual commercial energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of A8 7650K vs A10 7850K

CompuBench 1.5 (Bitcoin mining) Data courtesy CompuBench

A8 7650K
69.09 mHash/s
A10 7850K
89.37 mHash/s

CompuBench 1.5 (Face detection)

A8 7650K
12 mPixels/s
A10 7850K
17.29 mPixels/s

CompuBench 1.5 (T-Rex) Data courtesy CompuBench

A8 7650K
1.27 fps
A10 7850K
1.44 fps

PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated Data courtesy FutureMark

A8 7650K
3,107
A10 7850K
3,374

Sky Diver Data courtesy FutureMark

A8 7650K
4,862
A10 7850K
6,222

Cloud Gate Data courtesy FutureMark

A8 7650K
5,955
A10 7850K
7,530

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

A8 7650K
4,936
A10 7850K
5,501

PassMark (Single Core)

A8 7650K
1,428
A10 7850K
1,568

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

A8 7650K  vs
A10 7850K 
Clock speed 3.3 GHz 3.7 GHz
Turbo clock speed 3.8 GHz 4 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
F16C
MMX
AVX
SSE3
SSE
BMI1
AMD64
SSE4.1
FMA4
FMA3
SSE4.2
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
AES
TBM

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-2133
DDR3-1866
DDR3-1600
DDR3-1333
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Maximum bandwidth 34,133.32 MB/s 34,133.32 MB/s

details

A8 7650K  vs
A10 7850K 
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 4 MB 4 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 1 MB/core

integrated graphics

GPU GPU GPU
Label AMD Radeon R7 (6 CUs) Radeon™ R7 Series

power consumption

TDP 95W 65W
Annual home energy cost 22.89 $/year 15.66 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 83.22 $/year 56.94 $/year
Performance per watt 3.25 pt/W 9.86 pt/W
Typical power consumption 77.19W 52.81W
AMD A8 7650K
Report a correction
AMD A10 7850K
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus