AMD PRO A12-9800 versus AMD A10-9700
Analyse comparative des processeurs AMD PRO A12-9800 et AMD A10-9700 pour tous les caractéristiques dans les catégories suivants: Essentiel, Performance, Mémoire, Graphiques, Interfaces de graphiques, Soutien des graphiques API, Compatibilité, Périphériques, Technologies élevé, Virtualization. Analyse de référence de la performance des processeurs: PassMark - Single thread mark, PassMark - CPU mark, 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 - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps), Geekbench 4 - Single Core, Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core, 3DMark Fire Strike - Physics Score.
Différences
Raisons pour considerer le AMD PRO A12-9800
- Environ 11% vitesse de fonctionnement plus vite: 4.2 GHz versus 3.8 GHz
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en PassMark - Single thread mark: 1686 versus 1613
- Environ 5% meilleur performance en PassMark - CPU mark: 3705 versus 3544
- Environ 28% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 26.268 versus 20.497
- Environ 23% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 279.396 versus 227.004
- Environ 29% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 1.975 versus 1.533
- Environ 22% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 34.196 versus 27.928
- Environ 50% meilleur performance en CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 131.8 versus 87.933
| Caractéristiques | |
| Fréquence maximale | 4.2 GHz versus 3.8 GHz |
| Référence | |
| PassMark - Single thread mark | 1686 versus 1613 |
| PassMark - CPU mark | 3705 versus 3544 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 26.268 versus 20.497 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 279.396 versus 227.004 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.975 versus 1.533 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 34.196 versus 27.928 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 131.8 versus 87.933 |
Raisons pour considerer le AMD A10-9700
- CPU est plus nouveau: date de sortie 9 mois plus tard
- Processeur est ouvert; un multiplicateur ouvert soutien le overclocking plus facile
- Environ 15% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 1358 versus 1176
- 5x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 2370 versus 477
- 4.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames): 7174 versus 1715
- Environ 15% meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 1358 versus 1176
- 5x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 2370 versus 477
- 4.2x meilleur performance en GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps): 7174 versus 1715
| Caractéristiques | |
| Date de sortie | 27 July 2017 versus 3 October 2016 |
| Ouvert | Ouvert versus barré |
| Référence | |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1358 versus 1176 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 2370 versus 477 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 7174 versus 1715 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1358 versus 1176 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 2370 versus 477 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 7174 versus 1715 |
Comparer les références
CPU 1: AMD PRO A12-9800
CPU 2: AMD A10-9700
| PassMark - Single thread mark |
|
|
||||
| PassMark - CPU mark |
|
|
||||
| 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 - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
||||
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) |
|
|
| Nom | AMD PRO A12-9800 | AMD A10-9700 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark - Single thread mark | 1686 | 1613 |
| PassMark - CPU mark | 3705 | 3544 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 26.268 | 20.497 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 279.396 | 227.004 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 1.975 | 1.533 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 34.196 | 27.928 |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 131.8 | 87.933 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 1176 | 1358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 477 | 2370 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1715 | 7174 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 1176 | 1358 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 477 | 2370 |
| GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1715 | 7174 |
| Geekbench 4 - Single Core | 493 | |
| Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core | 1465 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike - Physics Score | 0 |
Comparer les caractéristiques
| AMD PRO A12-9800 | AMD A10-9700 | |
|---|---|---|
Essentiel |
||
| Family | AMD PRO A-Series Processors | AMD A-Series Processors |
| Date de sortie | 3 October 2016 | 27 July 2017 |
| OPN Tray | AD980BAUM44AB | AD9700AGM44AB |
| OS Support | Windows 10 - 64-Bit Edition, RHEL x86 64-Bit, Ubuntu x86 64-Bit | Windows 10 - 64-Bit Edition, RHEL x86 64-Bit, Ubuntu x86 64-Bit |
| Position dans l’évaluation de la performance | 991 | 922 |
| Série | AMD PRO A-Series A12 APU for Desktops | AMD A10-Series APU for Desktops |
| Segment vertical | Desktop | Desktop |
| Nom de code de l’architecture | Bristol Ridge | |
| Prix de sortie (MSRP) | $90 | |
| OPN PIB | AD9700AGABBOX | |
| Prix maintenant | $79.99 | |
| Valeur pour le prix (0-100) | 20.04 | |
Performance |
||
| Base frequency | 3.8 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| Cache L2 | 2 MB | 2 MB |
| Processus de fabrication | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Température de noyau maximale | 90°C | 90°C |
| Fréquence maximale | 4.2 GHz | 3.8 GHz |
| Nombre de noyaux | 4 | 4 |
| Number of GPU cores | 8 | 6 |
| Ouvert | ||
| Soutien de 64-bit | ||
| Compute Cores | 10 | |
| Taille de dé | 246 mm | |
| Température maximale de la caisse (TCase) | 74 °C | |
| Compte de transistor | 1178 million | |
Mémoire |
||
| Réseaux de mémoire maximale | 2 | 2 |
| Supported memory frequency | 2400 MHz | 2400 MHz |
| Genres de mémoire soutenus | DDR4 | |
Graphiques |
||
| Enduro | ||
| Freéquency maximale des graphiques | 1108 MHz | 1029 MHz |
| Graphiques du processeur | R7 | Radeon R7 Series |
| Unified Video Decoder (UVD) | ||
| Video Codec Engine (VCE) | ||
| Compte de noyaux iGPU | 6 | |
Interfaces de graphiques |
||
| DisplayPort | ||
| HDMI | ||
Soutien des graphiques API |
||
| DirectX | 12 | DirectX® 12 |
| Vulkan | ||
Compatibilité |
||
| Prise courants soutenu | AM4 | AM4 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 65 Watt | 65 Watt |
| Configurable TDP | 45/65 Watt | |
| Nombre de CPUs maximale dans une configuration | 1 | |
Périphériques |
||
| Révision PCI Express | 3.0 | 3.0 x8 |
| Nombre maximale des voies PCIe | 8 | |
Technologies élevé |
||
| AMD Secure technology | ||
| Enhanced Virus Protection (EVP) | ||
| FreeSync | ||
| Fused Multiply-Add 4 (FMA4) | ||
| Intel® Advanced Vector Extensions (AVX) | ||
| Intel® AES New Instructions | ||
| Out-of-band client management | ||
| PowerGating | ||
| PowerNow | ||
| PowerTune | ||
| System Image Stability | ||
| TrueAudio | ||
| Frame Rate Target Control (FRTC) | ||
| Fused Multiply-Add (FMA) | ||
| VirusProtect | ||
Virtualization |
||
| AMD Virtualization (AMD-V™) | ||
| IOMMU 2.0 | ||
Navigation
Choisir un CPU
Comparer les processeurs
Comparer AMD PRO A12-9800 avec des autres
AMDPRO A12-9800 vs
IntelCore i5-2500T
AMDPRO A12-9800 vs
IntelCore i3-9300T
AMDPRO A12-9800 vs
AMDRyzen 5 PRO 3400GE
AMDPRO A12-9800 vs
AMDAthlon Gold PRO 3150G
AMDPRO A12-9800 vs
IntelCore i3-10100T
AMDPRO A12-9800 vs
AMDRyzen 5 4500
