Winner
AMD FX 4100
CPUBoss recommends the AMD FX 4100 based on its .
See full details| | AMD Phenom X4 9500 vs FX 4100 |
| | Lower annual home energy cost 22.89 $/year | | Lower annual commercial energy cost 83.22 $/year |
| | Newer manufacturing process 32 nms | | Is unlocked Yes |
| | Significantly higher clock speed 3.6 GHz | | More l3 cache 8 MB |
by Legit Reviews (Nov, 2011)Reaching 4600 MHz with full stability on the FX-4100 is a great overclock considering the standard clock speed of this processor is 3600MHz.
Performance | |
Benchmark performance using all cores | |
| Phenom X4 9500 5.6 FX 4100 6.2 | |
| Passmark and GeekBench | |
Single-core Performance | |
Individual core benchmark performance | |
| Phenom X4 9500 6.5 FX 4100 7.4 | |
| Passmark (Single Core) | |
Power Consumption | |
How much power does the processor require? | |
| Phenom X4 9500 5.1 FX 4100 5.1 | |
| TDP | |
Value | |
| | |
| Phenom X4 9500 N/A FX 4100 N/A | |
| Performance Per Dollar | |
CPUBoss Score | |
Performance, Single-core Performance, Power Consumption and Value | |
| Phenom X4 9500 5.7 FX 4100 6.4 | |
| | | AMD FX 4100CPUBoss Winner |
| |||||||
| Lower annual home energy cost | 22.89 $/year | vs | 34.18 $/year | Around 35% lower annual home energy cost | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower annual commercial energy cost | 83.22 $/year | vs | 114.41 $/year | More than 25% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| |||||||
| Newer manufacturing process | 32 nms | vs | 65 nms | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Is unlocked | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; An unlocked multiplier allows for easier overclocking | |||
| Significantly higher clock speed | 3.6 GHz | vs | 2.2 GHz | Around 65% higher clock speed | |||
| More l3 cache | 8 MB | vs | 2 MB | 4x more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later | |||
| 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 | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.72 GHz | vs | 2.59 GHz | More than 80% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
| Much more l3 cache per core | 2 MB/core | vs | 0.5 MB/core | 4x more l3 cache per core | |||
| Significantly better 3DMark11 physics score | 5,760 | vs | 2,250 | More than 2.5x better 3DMark11 physics score | |||
| 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 | |||
| Marginally newer | Oct, 2011 | vs | Nov, 2007 | Release date over 3 years later | |||
| Better PassMark (Single core) score | 1,224 | vs | 749 | Around 65% better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
| Better PassMark score | 4,038 | vs | 2,227 | More than 80% better PassMark score | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.81 GHz | vs | 2.73 GHz | More than 75% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
| Slightly better geekbench (64-bit) score | 5,580 | vs | 4,337 | Around 30% better geekbench (64-bit) score | |||
FX 4100 | by damric (Sep, 2012)I ran a few quick benches like the CPU physics test in 3dmark11, and the linx FLOPS test.
FX 4100 | by Legit Reviews (Nov, 2011)The performance of the FX-4100 wasn't awful, but we didn't expect to see the AMD A6-3650 running at 2.6GHz to beat the AMD FX-4100 running at 3.6GHz in benchmarks like POV-Ray and Cinebench!
FX 4100 | by Legit Reviews (Nov, 2011)Benchmark Results: The AMD FX-4100 was able to hit an overall score of 14408 points in 3DMark Vantage, which puts it at the bottom of the performance chart.
summary | Phenom X4 9500 | vs | FX 4100 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 3.6 GHz | |
| Cores | Quad core | Quad core | |
| Socket type | |||
| AM2+ | |||
| AM3+ | |||
| Is unlocked | No | Yes | |
| Is hyperthreaded | No | No | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Has vitualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction-set-extensions | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| SSE4 | |||
| SSE4a | |||
| AES | |||
| 3DNow! | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
gpu | |||
| 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 | 1,800 MHz | 3,200 MHz | |
details | Phenom X4 9500 | 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 | 2 MB | 8 MB | |
| L3 cache per core | 0.5 MB/core | 2 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 65 nms | 32 nms | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 2 | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 70°C | Unknown - 70°C | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 2.59 GHz | 4.72 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 2.73 GHz | 4.81 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.59 GHz | 4.72 GHz | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 95W | 95W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 22.89 $/year | 34.18 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 83.22 $/year | 114.41 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 3.51 pt/W | 4.27 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 77.19W | N/A | |
| AMD Phenom X4 9500 | AMD FX 4100 |
| VS | |
| $250 | $125 | |
| 965 vs 4100 | ||
| VS | |
| $110 | $125 | |
| 6300 vs 4100 | ||
| VS | |
| $125 | $125 | |
| 3220 vs 4100 | ||
| VS | |
| $125 | ||
| 955 vs 4100 | ||
| VS | |
| $89 | $125 | |
| 4300 vs 4100 | ||
| VS | |
| $170 | $125 | |
| 8350 vs 4100 | ||
| VS | |
| $143 | $125 | |
| 8320 vs 4100 | ||
| VS | |
| $250 | $326 | |
| 9590 vs 4770K | ||
| VS | |
| $161 | $225 | |
| N3530 vs 3110M | ||
| VS | |
| $225 | ||
| N2830 vs 3217U | ||
| VS | |
| $340 | $326 | |
| 4790K vs 4770K | ||
| VS | |
| $378 | ||
| 4700MQ vs 5750M | ||
| VS | |
| 800 vs 5 Octa | ||
| VS | |
| $195 | ||
| 5200 vs 3470 | ||