FX-4170 vs Ryzen Embedded R1305G

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.

FX-4170 vs Ryzen Embedded R1305G 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.

FX-4170 vs Ryzen Embedded R1305G: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

FX-4170

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.3% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+100% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 4 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,121 vs 3,142).
❌
4.7% HIGHER MSRP
$157 MSRPvs$150 MSRP
❌1462.5% higher power demand at 125W vs 8W.

Ryzen Embedded R1305G

2020

Why buy it

✅+0.7% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $7 less on MSRP ($150 MSRP vs $157 MSRP).
✅Draws 8W instead of 125W, a 117W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than FX-4170 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Smaller total L3 cache (4 MB vs 8 MB).

Quick Answers

So, is Ryzen Embedded R1305G better than FX-4170?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, FX-4170 is ahead with a 6.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen Embedded R1305G pulls ahead with 0.7% better PassMark. FX-4170 also has the bigger cache pool with 100% larger total L3 cache (8 MB vs 4 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Ryzen Embedded R1305G is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Ryzen Embedded R1305G is the better buy right now. Ryzen Embedded R1305G comes in $7 cheaper on MSRP at $150 MSRP versus $157 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.7% better PassMark. The compromise is that FX-4170 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 6.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 5.4% better value on MSRP (20.9 vs 19.9 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Ryzen Embedded R1305G makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2012) and more multi-core headroom with 2 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.

FX-4170 vs Ryzen Embedded R1305G Technical Specifications

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

FX-4170

The FX-4170 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 27 February 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Zambezi (2011−2012) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 4.2 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L3 cache: 8192 kB. L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: AM3+. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,121 points. Launch price was $69.

Ryzen Embedded R1305G

The Ryzen Embedded R1305G is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 25 February 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Zen (2017−2020) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FP5. Thermal design power (TDP): 10 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2400. Passmark benchmark score: 3,142 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The FX-4170 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Ryzen Embedded R1305G offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the FX-4170 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the FX-4170 versus 2.8 GHz on the Ryzen Embedded R1305G — a 42.3% clock advantage for the FX-4170 (base: 4.2 GHz vs 1.5 GHz). The FX-4170 uses the Zambezi (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Ryzen Embedded R1305G uses Zen (2017−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the FX-4170 scores 3,121 against the Ryzen Embedded R1305G's 3,142 — a 0.7% lead for the Ryzen Embedded R1305G. L3 cache: 8192 kB on the FX-4170 vs 4 MB (total) on the Ryzen Embedded R1305G.

Feature	FX-4170	Ryzen Embedded R1305G
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 4
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+54%	2.8 GHz
Base Clock	4.2 GHz+180%	1.5 GHz
L3 Cache	8192 kB+100%	4 MB (total)
L2 Cache	4096 kB+700%	512 kB (per core)
Process	32 nm	14 nm-56%
Architecture	Zambezi (2011−2012)	Zen (2017−2020)
PassMark	3,121	3,142

🧠

Memory & Platform

The FX-4170 uses the AM3+ socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Ryzen Embedded R1305G uses FP5 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	FX-4170	Ryzen Embedded R1305G
Socket	AM3+	FP5
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the FX-4170 was priced at $157, while the Ryzen Embedded R1305G came in at $150. On launch pricing ($157 vs $150), Ryzen Embedded R1305G was $7 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the FX-4170 delivers 19.9 pts/$ vs 20.9 pts/$ for the Ryzen Embedded R1305G — making the Ryzen Embedded R1305G the 5.2% better value option.

Feature	FX-4170	Ryzen Embedded R1305G
MSRP	$157	$150-4%
Performance per Dollar	19.9	20.9+5%
Release Date	2012	2020

Search FX-4170 on Amazon

Search Ryzen Embedded R1305G 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.