CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 9370 vs 46 among all CPUs

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

FX 9370
6.2
Athlon 46
4.9
FX 8350
6.2
PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

FX 9370
7.7
Athlon 46
n.d.
FX 8350
7.6
PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics

FX 9370
0.0
Athlon 46
0.0
FX 8350
0.0
Sky Diver and Cloud Gate

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing

FX 9370
0.0
Athlon 46
0.0
FX 8350
0.0
CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?

FX 9370
5.0
Athlon 46
5.1
FX 8350
5.0
Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

FX 9370
5.3
Athlon 46
n.d.
FX 8350
5.6
Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

5.4

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

FX 9370
5.4
Athlon 46
4.6
FX 8350
5.4

Winner
AMD FX 9370 

CPUBoss recommends the AMD FX 9370  based on its performance.

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 FX 9370

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 9370

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 8 MB vs 0.5 MB 16x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much higher clock speed 4.4 GHz vs 2.1 GHz More than 2x higher clock speed
Is unlocked Yes vs No Somewhat common; An unlocked multiplier allows for easier overclocking
Much newer manufacturing process 32 nm vs 65 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
More cores 8 vs 1 7 more cores; run more applications at once
Much better PassMark score 9,524 vs 473 Around 20.2x better PassMark score
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
More threads 8 vs 1 7 more threads
Significantly better performance per watt 4.86 pt/W vs 0.77 pt/W More than 6.2x better performance per watt
Front view of AMD Athlon 46

Reasons to consider the
AMD Athlon 46

Report a correction
Much lower typical power consumption 20.31W vs 178.75W 8.8x lower typical power consumption
Much lower annual home energy cost 6.02 $/year vs 53 $/year 8.8x lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 21.9 $/year vs 192.72 $/year 8.8x lower annual commercial energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of FX 9370 vs Athlon 46

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

FX 9370
9,524
Athlon 46
473

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

FX 9370  vs
Athlon 46 
Clock speed 4.4 GHz 2.1 GHz
Cores Octa core Single core
Socket type
AM3+
S1
Is unlocked Yes No

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
AVX 1.1
SSE2
F16C
MMX
XOP
AVX
SSE3
SSE
ABM
BMI1
CLMUL
AMD64
SSE4.1
FMA4
FMA3
SSE4.2
CVT16
AMD-V
3DNow!
Supplemental SSE3
AES
TBM
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

details

FX 9370  vs
Athlon 46 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 8 1
L2 cache 8 MB 0.5 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nm 65 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

integrated graphics

GPU None None
Label N/A N/A
Latest DirectX N/A N/A
Number of displays supported N/A N/A
GPU clock speed N/A N/A
Turbo clock speed N/A N/A
3DMark06 N/A N/A

power consumption

TDP 220W 25W
Annual home energy cost 53 $/year 6.02 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 192.72 $/year 21.9 $/year
Performance per watt 4.86 pt/W 0.77 pt/W
Typical power consumption 178.75W 20.31W
AMD FX 9370
Report a correction
AMD Athlon 46
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus