Athlon X4 950 vs PRO A10-8770

Athlon X4 950 vs PRO A10-8770 Performance Spectrum

Athlon X4 950

4 / 4

3,576

+0.8%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

PRO A10-8770

4 / 4

3,547

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Athlon X4 950 vs PRO A10-8770 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Athlon X4 950 vs PRO A10-8770: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Athlon X4 950

2017

Why buy it

✅+0.8% higher PassMark.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike PRO A10-8770.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $58 MSRP, while PRO A10-8770 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

PRO A10-8770

2016

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,547 vs 3,576).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Athlon X4 950.

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon X4 950 better than PRO A10-8770?

Yes. Athlon X4 950 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.8% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

For gaming, this matchup is basically a tie in the data we have.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Athlon X4 950 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.8% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Athlon X4 950 is the better buy right now. Athlon X4 950 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $58 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (61.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Athlon X4 950 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2016) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Athlon X4 950 vs PRO A10-8770 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Athlon X4 950

The Athlon X4 950 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 27 July 2017 (8 years ago). It is based on the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 3,576 points. Launch price was $60.

PRO A10-8770

The PRO A10-8770 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Outubro 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Carrizo (2015−2018) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: AM4. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 3,547 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon X4 950 and PRO A10-8770 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.8 GHz on the Athlon X4 950 versus 3.8 GHz on the PRO A10-8770 — identical boost frequencies (base: 3.5 GHz vs 3.5 GHz). The Athlon X4 950 uses the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the PRO A10-8770 uses Carrizo (2015−2018) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon X4 950 scores 3,576 against the PRO A10-8770's 3,547 — a 0.8% lead for the Athlon X4 950.

Feature	Athlon X4 950	PRO A10-8770
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	3.8 GHz	3.8 GHz
Base Clock	3.5 GHz	3.5 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	—
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	2048 kB+300%
Process	28 nm	28 nm
Architecture	Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)	Carrizo (2015−2018)
PassMark	3,576	3,547
Geekbench 6 Single	656	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	1,637	—