AMD Phenom II X4 965 vs Athlon 64 X2 4400+ |
Released November, 2009
AMD Phenom II X4 965
- 3.4 GHz
- Quad core
- Unlocked
Reasons to buy the AMD Phenom II X4 965
 | Much more l2 cache 2 MB | | Much higher clock speed 3.4 GHz |
| | Much newer manufacturing process 45 nm | | Much better PassMark score 5,916 |
VS
First seen on January, 2013
AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+
- 2.3 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Athlon 64 X2 4400+
| | Much lower typical power consumption 52.81W | | Much lower annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year |
| | Much lower annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much more l2 cache | 2 MB | vs | 1 MB | 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much higher clock speed | 3.4 GHz | vs | 2.3 GHz | Around 50% higher clock speed | |||
| Much newer manufacturing process | 45 nm | vs | 90 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Much better PassMark score | 5,916 | vs | 1,145 | Around 5.2x better PassMark score | |||
| Much better PassMark (Single core) score | 1,361 | vs | 691 | More than 95% better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
| Much better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score | 5,974 | vs | 1,629 | Around 3.8x better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score | |||
| More cores | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
| More threads | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many threads | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.05 GHz | vs | 2.75 GHz | More than 45% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.22 GHz | vs | 3.13 GHz | Around 35% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
| |||||||
| Much lower typical power consumption | 52.81W | vs | 152.93W | 2.9x lower typical power consumption | |||
| Much lower annual home energy cost | 15.66 $/year | vs | 54.06 $/year | 3.5x lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Much lower annual commercial energy cost | 56.94 $/year | vs | 152.42 $/year | 2.7x lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Phenom II X4 965 vs Athlon 64 X2 4400+
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Phenom II X4 965 | vs | Athlon 64 X2 4400+ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 3.4 GHz | 2.3 GHz | |
| Cores | Quad core | Dual core | |
| Socket type | |||
| AM3 | |||
| AM2 | |||
| 939 | |||
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE4a | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE | |||
| 3DNow! | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
details | Phenom II X4 965 | vs | Athlon 64 X2 4400+ |
|---|---|---|---|
| Threads | 4 | 2 | |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 1 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 0.5 MB/core | 0.5 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 45 nm | 90 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 4.05 GHz | 2.75 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.22 GHz | 3.13 GHz | |
| PassMark (Overclocked) | 3,136.7 | 1,605.4 | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.05 GHz | 2.75 GHz | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 140W | 65W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 54.06 $/year | 15.66 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 152.42 $/year | 56.94 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 1.08 pt/W | 0.89 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 152.93W | 52.81W | |
 AMD Phenom II X4 965  Report a correction |  AMD Athlon 64 X2 4400+ Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $100 | $200 | |
| 6300 vs 965 | ||
 | VS | |
| $200 | ||
| 640 vs 965 | ||
 | VS | |
| $125 | $200 | |
| 3220 vs 965 | ||
 | VS | |
| $128 | $200 | |
| 8350 vs 965 | ||
 | VS | |
| $80 | $200 | |
| 4300 vs 965 | ||
 | VS | |
| $200 | ||
| 250 vs 965 | ||
 | VS |  |
| E6300 vs 4400+ | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $300 | $305 | |
| 2500 vs W3520 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $350 | $272 | |
| 6700K vs 4790K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6410 vs 4200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 7th Gen A9-9410 vs 6200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $225 | $134 | |
| 3217U vs 847 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $161 | $275 | |
| N3540 vs 4005U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $230 | $248 | |
| 9590 vs 4770K | ||
