AMD A10-7890K vs AMD Athlon X4 950 Comparison

The AMD Athlon X4 950 and AMD A10-7890K are both quad-core desktop processors from AMD, but they represent distinct generations and platform strategies. The Athlon X4 950, built on the Excavator architecture for Socket AM4, ships with DDR4 memory support and a 65W TDP. The A10-7890K, built on the older Steamroller architecture for Socket FM2+, offers higher clock speeds, DDR3 support, and integrated Radeon R7 graphics. Benchmark data shows the Athlon X4 950 holds a narrow but consistent lead across all tested Cinebench workloads, while the A10-7890K counters with a larger PCIe lane allocation and an unlocked multiplier. The following analysis breaks down the architectural split, benchmark results, and the practical implications of each chip’s design.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Athlon X4 950 scores 3041 points in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the AMD A10-7890K scores 3009 points. The Athlon X4 950 leads by 1.1%.

Q: Do both processors have the same number of cores and threads?

A: Yes. Both the AMD Athlon X4 950 and the AMD A10-7890K feature 4 cores and 4 threads, with no hyper-threading or SMT support on either chip.

Q: What is the difference in memory support between the two?

A: The Athlon X4 950 supports DDR4 memory with dual-channel bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The A10-7890K supports DDR3 memory with dual-channel bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. The Athlon X4 950 has the higher theoretical memory bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics?

A: Only the AMD A10-7890K includes integrated graphics, featuring a Radeon R7 iGPU. The AMD Athlon X4 950 has no integrated graphics.

Q: Does the Athlon X4 950 outperform the A10-7890K in every benchmark listed?

A: Yes, the head-to-head data shows the Athlon X4 950 wins all 5 benchmark comparisons, with deltas ranging from 1% in Cinebench R15 multi-core to 1.2% in Cinebench R23 single-core.

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?

A: The Athlon X4 950 has an average benchmark score of 1047, while the A10-7890K averages 1035. The Athlon X4 950 sits at the 29th percentile of all CPUs, and the A10-7890K sits at the 28th percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge significantly in their underlying architectures, despite both being 28nm parts from GlobalFoundries. The Athlon X4 950 uses the Excavator architecture under the Bristol Ridge codename, while the A10-7890K uses the older Steamroller architecture under the Godaveri codename. This generational gap is reflected in transistor counts: the Athlon X4 950 packs 3,100 million transistors on a 250 mm² die, whereas the A10-7890K has 2,411 million transistors on a 245 mm² die. The newer Excavator design is denser and more efficient.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Athlon X4 950 has a larger L1 cache at 320 KB, but a smaller L2 cache at 2 MB. The A10-7890K reverses this, with 256 KB of L1 cache and a larger 4 MB of L2 cache. Neither processor has any L3 cache, so the L2 allocation is the primary on-die data reservoir for each chip.

Memory support marks a clear platform division. The Athlon X4 950 is built for Socket AM4 and pairs with DDR4 memory, delivering 38.4 GB/s of dual-channel bandwidth. The A10-7890K uses Socket FM2+ and is limited to DDR3, providing 34.1 GB/s of dual-channel bandwidth. The Athlon X4 950’s memory controller is therefore both newer and faster, offering a 9.4 GB/s bandwidth advantage.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Athlon X4 950 provides 8 PCIe Gen 3 lanes from the CPU, while the A10-7890K offers 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes. This gives the A10-7890K double the CPU-attached lane count, which is relevant for discrete GPU bandwidth in a single-card configuration. Neither chip supports ECC memory.

The A10-7890K compensates for its older architecture with higher clock speeds. Its base clock is 4.00 GHz and boost clock is 4.30 GHz, compared to the Athlon X4 950’s 3.50 GHz base and 3.80 GHz boost. This gives the A10-7890K a 500 MHz advantage at base and a 500 MHz advantage at boost. However, this comes at a power cost: the A10-7890K has a 95W TDP versus 65W for the Athlon X4 950.

Another distinguishing feature is the unlocked multiplier. The A10-7890K has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, while the Athlon X4 950 is locked. The A10-7890K also includes the Radeon R7 integrated graphics, which the Athlon X4 950 lacks entirely. Production statuses differ as well: the Athlon X4 950 is listed as Active, while the A10-7890K is End-of-life.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Athlon X4 950 wins every single head-to-head comparison against the AMD A10-7890K. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Athlon X4 950 scores 306 versus 303, a 1% lead. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the scores are 1277 versus 1263, a 1.1% lead. The single-core tests follow the same pattern, with the Athlon X4 950 leading by 1.1% in Cinebench R20 single-core (180 versus 178) and by 1.2% in Cinebench R23 single-core (429 versus 424). The largest margin is a mere 1.2%, but it is consistent across all workloads.

For users building on the modern AM4 platform with DDR4 memory, the Athlon X4 950 is the clear choice. It delivers higher raw performance across the board, runs at a significantly lower 65W TDP, and is still an active product. The 38.4 GB/s memory bandwidth and Excavator architecture give it a structural advantage that clocks alone cannot overcome for the A10-7890K.

The A10-7890K’s case rests on features outside the Cinebench suite. It has integrated Radeon R7 graphics, making it a complete solution for systems without a discrete GPU. Its 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes provide more headroom for GPU connectivity. The unlocked multiplier appeals to users who want to manually overclock, and the 4 MB L2 cache is double the Athlon’s allocation. However, these attributes do not translate into a performance win in the tested benchmarks. The A10-7890K also carries a 95W TDP, a 30W penalty over the Athlon X4 950, and is end-of-life.

For a pure CPU performance perspective, the Athlon X4 950 is the superior part. For a legacy FM2+ system or a build requiring integrated graphics and overclocking, the A10-7890K has niche appeal. But the data shows that in every measured Cinebench workload, the Athlon X4 950 comes out ahead.

Specification Differences

The following specifications differ between the AMD Athlon X4 950 and the AMD A10-7890K:

• Base Clock: 3.50 GHz (Athlon X4 950) vs 4.00 GHz (A10-7890K)
• Boost Clock: 3.80 GHz (Athlon X4 950) vs 4.30 GHz (A10-7890K)
• TDP: 65W (Athlon X4 950) vs 95W (A10-7890K)
• Socket: AMD Socket AM4 (Athlon X4 950) vs AMD Socket FM2+ (A10-7890K)
• Architecture: Excavator (Athlon X4 950) vs Steamroller (A10-7890K)
• Codename: Bristol Ridge (Athlon X4 950) vs Godaveri (A10-7890K)
• Transistors: 3,100 million (Athlon X4 950) vs 2,411 million (A10-7890K)
• Die Size: 250 mm² (Athlon X4 950) vs 245 mm² (A10-7890K)
• L1 Cache: 320 KB (Athlon X4 950) vs 256 KB (A10-7890K)
• L2 Cache: 2 MB (Athlon X4 950) vs 4 MB (A10-7890K)
• Memory Support: DDR4 (Athlon X4 950) vs DDR3 (A10-7890K)
• Memory Bandwidth: 38.4 GB/s (Athlon X4 950) vs 34.1 GB/s (A10-7890K)
• PCIe Lanes: 8 lanes, Gen 3 (Athlon X4 950) vs 16 lanes, Gen 3 (A10-7890K)
• Integrated Graphics: None (Athlon X4 950) vs Radeon R7 (A10-7890K)
• Production Status: Active (Athlon X4 950) vs End-of-life (A10-7890K)
• Multiplier Unlocked: No (Athlon X4 950) vs Yes (A10-7890K)

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results paint a picture of near-identical performance with a slight but decisive edge for the Athlon X4 950. Across all five Cinebench tests, the Athlon X4 950 wins with deltas ranging from 1.0% to 1.2%. The margins are small enough that real-world application differences would be barely perceptible, but the consistency of the lead suggests a structural advantage rather than a measurement artifact.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Athlon X4 950 scores 306 against the A10-7890K’s 303. This 1% delta is the smallest of the set. Moving to Cinebench R20 multi-core, the Athlon X4 950 scores 1277 versus 1263, widening the lead to 1.1%. The single-core results follow a similar trajectory. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Athlon X4 950 posts 180 versus 178, a 1.1% advantage. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the scores are 429 and 424 respectively, giving the Athlon X4 950 its largest margin at 1.2%.

The Cinebench R23 multi-core test shows the Athlon X4 950 at 3041 points and the A10-7890K at 3009 points, a 32-point gap that translates to a 1.1% lead. This is the highest absolute score in the comparison, but the relative difference remains in line with the other tests.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this picture. The Athlon X4 950 averages 1047, while the A10-7890K averages 1035. The Athlon X4 950’s nearest rivals include the AMD PRO A10-8770 at 1046 and the Intel Core i5-6350HQ at 1046, both within 0.1% of its score. The A10-7890K’s closest competitor is the AMD A8-7680 at 1036, which is 0.1% faster than the A10-7890K’s 1035 average.

The Athlon X4 950’s wins are consistent but narrow. The A10-7890K’s higher clocks — 4.30 GHz boost versus 3.80 GHz — are not enough to overcome the Excavator architecture’s efficiency gains and the Athlon’s faster DDR4 memory bandwidth. The 4 MB L2 cache on the A10-7890K does not compensate for the performance deficit in these CPU-bound tests. The data shows a clean sweep: 5 wins for the Athlon X4 950, 0 wins for the A10-7890K.