AMD Phenom II X4 925 vs AMD Phenom II X4 810
Comparative analysis of AMD Phenom II X4 925 and AMD Phenom II X4 810 processors for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Performance, Memory, Compatibility. Benchmark processor performance analysis: PassMark - Single thread mark, PassMark - CPU mark, Geekbench 4 - Single Core, Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s).
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Phenom II X4 925
- CPU is newer: launch date 2 month(s) later
- Around 8% higher clock speed: 2.8 GHz vs 2.6 GHz
- Around 50% more L3 cache; more data can be stored in the L3 cache for quick access later
- Around 11% better performance in PassMark - Single thread mark: 1150 vs 1034
- Around 15% better performance in PassMark - CPU mark: 2272 vs 1971
- Around 1% better performance in Geekbench 4 - Single Core: 357 vs 352
- Around 32% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 10.457 vs 7.907
- Around 15% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.197 vs 0.172
Specifications (specs) | |
Launch date | May 2009 vs February 2009 |
Maximum frequency | 2.8 GHz vs 2.6 GHz |
L3 cache | 6144 KB (shared) vs 4096 KB (shared) |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - Single thread mark | 1150 vs 1034 |
PassMark - CPU mark | 2272 vs 1971 |
Geekbench 4 - Single Core | 357 vs 352 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 10.457 vs 7.907 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.197 vs 0.172 |
Reasons to consider the AMD Phenom II X4 810
- Around 5% better performance in Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core: 1207 vs 1147
- 3x better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 3.314 vs 1.088
- Around 6% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 3.432 vs 3.231
Benchmarks | |
Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core | 1207 vs 1147 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 3.314 vs 1.088 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 3.432 vs 3.231 |
Compare benchmarks
CPU 1: AMD Phenom II X4 925
CPU 2: AMD Phenom II X4 810
PassMark - Single thread mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - CPU mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench 4 - Single Core |
|
|
||||
Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
Name | AMD Phenom II X4 925 | AMD Phenom II X4 810 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - Single thread mark | 1150 | 1034 |
PassMark - CPU mark | 2272 | 1971 |
Geekbench 4 - Single Core | 357 | 352 |
Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core | 1147 | 1207 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 1.088 | 3.314 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 10.457 | 7.907 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.197 | 0.172 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 3.231 | 3.432 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD Phenom II X4 925 | AMD Phenom II X4 810 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture codename | Deneb | Deneb |
Launch date | May 2009 | February 2009 |
Launch price (MSRP) | $160 | $116 |
Place in performance rating | 2969 | 2986 |
Price now | $43.99 | $115.99 |
Value for money (0-100) | 22.90 | 7.94 |
Vertical segment | Desktop | Desktop |
Performance |
||
64 bit support | ||
Die size | 258 mm | 258 mm |
L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 128 KB (per core) |
L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |
L3 cache | 6144 KB (shared) | 4096 KB (shared) |
Manufacturing process technology | 45 nm | 45 nm |
Maximum frequency | 2.8 GHz | 2.6 GHz |
Number of cores | 4 | 4 |
Transistor count | 758 million | 758 million |
Memory |
||
Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
Compatibility |
||
Max number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 |
Sockets supported | AM3 | AM3 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 95 Watt | 95 Watt |