CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 965 vs 4100


Benchmark performance using all cores

Cinebench R11.5, Passmark and GeekBench

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

Cinebench R11.5 (1-core) and Passmark (Single Core)

Power Consumption

How much power does the processor require?



Performance Per Dollar

CPUBoss Score

Performance, Single-core Performance, Power Consumption and Value

AMD Phenom II X4 965 

CPUBoss recommends the AMD Phenom II X4 965  based on its .

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!

AMD Phenom II X4 965

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of AMD Phenom II X4 965

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of AMD Phenom II X4 965

Reasons to consider the
AMD Phenom II X4 965

Report a correction
Better PassMark score 5,916 vs 4,044 More than 45% better PassMark score
Better cinebench r11.5 score 4 vs 2.96 More than 35% better cinebench r11.5 score
Better cinebench r11.5 (1-core) score 1.02 vs 0.91 More than 10% better cinebench r11.5 (1-core) score
Front view of AMD FX 4100

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 4100

Report a correction
Newer manufacturing process 32 nms vs 45 nms A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
More l2 cache 4 MB vs 2 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Slightly higher clock speed 3.6 GHz vs 3.4 GHz More than 5% higher clock speed
Significantly more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Supports more CPUs in SMP configuration 2 vs 1 Twice as many CPUs in SMP configuration
Better 3DMark11 physics score 5,760 vs 4,100 More than 40% better 3DMark11 physics score
More l3 cache per core 2 MB/core vs 1.5 MB/core Around 35% more l3 cache per core
Newer Oct, 2011 vs Nov, 2009 Release date over 1 years later
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.71 GHz vs 4.06 GHz More than 15% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Higher Maximum Operating Temperature 70 °C vs 62 °C Around 15% higher Maximum Operating Temperature
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 34.18 $/year vs 54.06 $/year More than 35% lower annual home energy cost
Slightly better performance per dollar 5.44 pt/$ vs 4.6 pt/$ Around 20% better performance per dollar
Lower annual commercial energy cost 114.41 $/year vs 152.42 $/year Around 25% lower annual commercial energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Phenom II X4 965 vs FX 4100

GeekBench (32-bit)

x264 HD 4.0

Phenom II X4 965
66.6 fps
FX 4100
53.9 fps

3D Mark 11 (Physics)

Phenom II X4 965 FX 4100 @ community.futuremark.com

Cinebench R11.5 (Single Core)


Phenom II X4 965 FX 4100 @ cpubenchmark.net

Reviews Word on the street

Phenom II X4 965  vs FX 4100 

The six-core chip definitely makes more sense for a video editing rig.
Phenom II X4 965

At 4ghz under water, the C3 revision of this chip is a very good performer for the price.
Phenom II X4 965


8.4 Out of 10
8.1 Out of 10

Specifications Full list of technical specs


Phenom II X4 965  vs
FX 4100 
Clock speed 3.4 GHz 3.6 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad core
Socket type
Is unlocked Yes Yes
Is hyperthreaded No No


Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes


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


Clock speed 2,000 MHz 3,200 MHz


Phenom II X4 965  vs
FX 4100 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 2 MB 4 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 1 MB/core
L3 cache 6 MB 8 MB
L3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core 2 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nms 32 nms
Transistor count 758,000,000 1,600,000,000
Max CPUs 1 2
Voltage range 0.85 - 1.43V 1.14 - 1.55V
Operating temperature Unknown - 62°C Unknown - 70°C


Overclock popularity 22 127
Overclock review score 5 4
Overclocked clock speed 4.06 GHz 4.71 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.4 GHz 3.6 GHz
PassMark (Overclocked) 3,136.7 2,972.7
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.06 GHz 4.71 GHz

power consumption

TDP 140W 95W
Annual home energy cost 54.06 $/year 34.18 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 152.42 $/year 114.41 $/year
Performance per watt 3.28 pt/W 4.17 pt/W
Idle power consumption 89.7W 43W
Peak power consumption 174W 130.6W
Typical power consumption 152.93W N/A
AMD Phenom II X4 965
Report a correction
AMD FX 4100
Report a correction


Showing 3 comments.
Yes but the advancement is in price not all of us can spend much money on processor
if u still got min budget n cant buy intel based rig. u r good 2 go with AMD FX 6300 chip which has AVX n AES instructons n if u r budget permits opt for an FX 8350 which will b good for the long run of the rig.
it's really true that phenom black edition cpu's(Solid gaming chip) still rock when compared to the newer quad core FX series chips there is not much performance jump between these two chips and the phenom 2 X4 single core performance and overall cores performance is 10% faster than the current FX 4100 chip. Even after 2.5 years there is still no performance improvement in the FX chips. what amd has done except for switching from 45nm to 32nm & instead of improving the architecture & efficiency they just upped their level 2,level 3 caches by 2mb and processing speed of 3.4Ghz to 3.6 n 3.8Ghz in the FX 4300. if u r in to just gaming n low on budget go for amd platform like this cpu AMD FX 4300@.3.8Ghz.ASUS.gigabyte based AMD 760G chip n a AMD 7770 gpu.with RAM capacity depending on u r budget. if u r in to productivity and wanna use u r pc for some photo n video editing n some threaded apps u can go for H61 based mobo from ASUS,gigabyte with Core i3 3220@3.3Ghz and a nice Gpu like HD 7770 or GTX 650,660.
comments powered by Disqus