CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 965 vs N950 among all CPUs

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics

Sky Diver and Cloud Gate

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing

CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

5.2

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
AMD Phenom II X4 965 

CPUBoss recommends the AMD Phenom II X4 965  based on its performance and single-core 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

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
Is unlocked Yes vs No Somewhat common; An unlocked multiplier allows for easier overclocking
Much higher clock speed 3.4 GHz vs 2.1 GHz More than 60% higher clock speed
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.05 GHz vs 2.1 GHz Around 95% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score 1,361 vs 717 Around 90% better PassMark (Single core) score
Better PassMark score 5,916 vs 2,500 More than 2.2x better PassMark score
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.22 GHz vs 2.1 GHz More than 2x better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of AMD Phenom II N950

Reasons to consider the
AMD Phenom II N950

Report a correction
Much lower typical power consumption 28.44W vs 152.93W 5.4x lower typical power consumption
Much lower annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year vs 54.06 $/year 6.4x lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year vs 152.42 $/year 5x lower annual commercial energy cost
Better performance per watt 2.92 pt/W vs 1.08 pt/W Around 2.8x better performance per watt
Newer Oct, 2010 vs Nov, 2009 Release date 11 months later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Phenom II X4 965 vs N950

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

Phenom II X4 965
137,800 MB/s
Phenom II N950
83,150 MB/s

GeekBench (32-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
N950 
Clock speed 3.4 GHz 2.1 GHz
Cores Quad core Quad 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
SSE2
MMX
SSE3
SSE
3DNow!
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 140W 35W
Annual home energy cost 54.06 $/year 8.43 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 152.42 $/year 30.66 $/year
Performance per watt 1.08 pt/W 2.92 pt/W
Typical power consumption 152.93W 28.44W

details

Phenom II X4 965  vs
N950 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 2 MB 2 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nm 45 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 4.05 GHz 2.1 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.22 GHz 2.1 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.05 GHz 2.1 GHz

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

bus

Clock speed 2,000 MHz 1,800 MHz
AMD Phenom II X4 965
Report a correction
AMD Phenom II N950
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus