Athlon X4 970 vs FX-4100

Athlon X4 970 vs FX-4100 Performance Spectrum

Athlon X4 970

4 / 4

2,644

+0.5%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

FX-4100

4 / 4

2,630

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

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 970 vs FX-4100 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 970 vs FX-4100: 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 970

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $30 less on MSRP ($85 MSRP vs $115 MSRP).
✅Delivers 36.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 31.1 vs 22.9 PassMark/$ ($85 MSRP vs $115 MSRP).
✅Draws 65W instead of 95W, a 30W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

FX-4100

2011

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Athlon X4 970 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (2,630 vs 2,644).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 22.9 vs 31.1 PassMark/$ ($115 MSRP vs $85 MSRP).
❌46.2% higher power demand at 95W vs 65W.

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon X4 970 better than FX-4100?

Yes. Athlon X4 970 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 3.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.5% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Athlon X4 970 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.1% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Athlon X4 970 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.5% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Athlon X4 970 is the better buy right now. Athlon X4 970 comes in $30 cheaper on MSRP at $85 MSRP versus $115 MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 36.0% better value on MSRP (31.1 vs 22.9 PassMark/$), 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 970 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2011) 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 970 vs FX-4100 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon X4 970

The Athlon X4 970 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.8 GHz, with boost up to 4 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: 2,644 points. Launch price was $149.

FX-4100

The FX-4100 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 12 October 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Zambezi (2011−2012) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.6 GHz, with boost up to 3.8 GHz. L3 cache: 8192 kB. L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,630 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon X4 970 and FX-4100 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4 GHz on the Athlon X4 970 versus 3.8 GHz on the FX-4100 — a 5.1% clock advantage for the Athlon X4 970 (base: 3.8 GHz vs 3.6 GHz). The Athlon X4 970 uses the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the FX-4100 uses Zambezi (2011−2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon X4 970 scores 2,644 against the FX-4100's 2,630 — a 0.5% lead for the Athlon X4 970. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon X4 970 vs 8192 kB on the FX-4100.

Feature	Athlon X4 970	FX-4100
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	4 GHz+5%	3.8 GHz
Base Clock	3.8 GHz+6%	3.6 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	8192 kB
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	4096 kB+700%
Process	28 nm-13%	32 nm
Architecture	Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)	Zambezi (2011−2012)
PassMark	2,644	2,630

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon X4 970 uses the AM4 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the FX-4100 uses AM3+ (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Athlon X4 970	FX-4100
Socket	AM4	AM3+
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2400	—
Max RAM Capacity	64 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	8	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Athlon X4 970 was priced at $85, while the FX-4100 came in at $115. On launch pricing ($85 vs $115), Athlon X4 970 was $30 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon X4 970 delivers 31.1 pts/$ vs 22.9 pts/$ for the FX-4100 — making the Athlon X4 970 the 30.5% better value option.

Feature	Athlon X4 970	FX-4100
MSRP	$85-26%	$115
Performance per Dollar	31.1+36%	22.9
Release Date	2017	2011

Search Athlon X4 970 on Amazon

Search FX-4100 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.