Athlon X4 950 vs PRO A10-9700

Athlon X4 950 vs PRO A10-9700 Performance Spectrum

Athlon X4 950

4 / 4

3,576

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

PRO A10-9700

4 / 4

3,600

+0.7%

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 A10-9700 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 A10-9700: 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

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike PRO A10-9700.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,576 vs 3,600).
❌Launch MSRP is still $58 MSRP, while PRO A10-9700 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

PRO A10-9700

2017

Why buy it

✅+0.7% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Athlon X4 950.

Quick Answers

So, is PRO A10-9700 better than Athlon X4 950?

Yes. PRO A10-9700 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.7% 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, PRO A10-9700 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

PRO A10-9700 is still the better call for a fresh build. PRO A10-9700 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $58 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Athlon X4 950 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is so cheap, but its absolute performance tier is too low to be the better recommendation now. At roughly 3,576 PassMark with 4 cores and 4 threads, it only really makes sense as a bare-minimum stopgap or a very constrained existing-platform upgrade.

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

PRO A10-9700 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting 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 A10-9700 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 A10-9700

The PRO A10-9700 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. 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: 3,600 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon X4 950 and PRO A10-9700 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 A10-9700 — identical boost frequencies (base: 3.5 GHz vs 3.5 GHz). Both are built on the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture using a 28 nm process. In PassMark, the Athlon X4 950 scores 3,576 against the PRO A10-9700's 3,600 — a 0.7% lead for the PRO A10-9700.

Feature	Athlon X4 950	PRO A10-9700
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)	Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)
PassMark	3,576	3,600
Geekbench 6 Single	656	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	1,637	—