AMD A10-9700 vs AMD Athlon X4 950 Comparison

The AMD Athlon X4 950 and AMD A10-9700 are two Bristol Ridge desktop parts that share the same silicon foundation, but the data in the database shows they are positioned for different system builds. Both are 4-core, 4-thread processors with identical clock speeds, but the Athlon X4 950 consistently edges out the A10-9700 in every recorded CPU benchmark, while the A10-9700 brings an integrated Radeon R7 graphics unit that the Athlon lacks entirely.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the AMD Athlon X4 950 wins all five recorded head-to-head tests against the A10-9700. The margins are narrow, ranging from 1.1% to 1.3%, but they are consistent across every Cinebench workload, both single-core and multi-core. This means that in any scenario where the CPU is doing the heavy lifting, such as rendering, encoding, or general productivity, the Athlon X4 950 is the better choice, even if the advantage is not dramatic.

The AMD A10-9700, on the other hand, wins in a category that the benchmark scores alone cannot capture: system integration. Its integrated Radeon R7 graphics means it can serve as a complete desktop solution without a discrete graphics card. The Athlon X4 950 has no integrated graphics, so a system built around it will require a separate GPU to output video. For a compact office PC, a media center, or a basic home machine where gaming is not a priority, the A10-9700’s built-in graphics capability makes it the more practical option, despite losing every CPU benchmark.

The percentile ranking supports this split. The Athlon X4 950 sits at the 29th percentile of all CPUs in the database, while the A10-9700 sits at the 28th. The average benchmark score difference is small: 1047 for the Athlon versus 1034 for the A10. These are entry-level desktop processors, and the data indicates that the performance gap between them is much smaller than the feature gap. If you need a processor-only part and plan to pair it with a dedicated GPU, the Athlon X4 950 is the winner. If you need a single-chip solution with graphics output, the A10-9700 is the only one of the two that qualifies.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The AMD Athlon X4 950. In Cinebench R15 multi-core it scores 306 versus 302 for the A10-9700, a 1.3% advantage. The same 1.3% lead appears in Cinebench R20 multi-core, with scores of 1277 versus 1261. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Athlon scores 3041 versus 3004, a 1.2% lead.

Q: Is the single-core performance different between the two?

A: Yes, but only slightly. The Athlon X4 950 wins Cinebench R20 single-core with 180 versus 178, a 1.1% lead. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 429 versus 424, a 1.2% margin. The Athlon wins both, but the differences are within a few points.

Q: Do these processors have integrated graphics?

A: No, the AMD Athlon X4 950 does not have integrated graphics. The AMD A10-9700 includes a Radeon R7 integrated graphics unit. This is the primary functional difference between the two parts.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The Athlon X4 950 has an average benchmark score of 1047, while the A10-9700 has an average of 1034. The Athlon’s closest rival, the AMD PRO A10-8770, scores 1046, and the A10-9700’s closest rival, the AMD A10-7890K, scores 1035.

Q: Are the clock speeds the same?

A: Yes. Both processors have a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 3.80 GHz. They also share the same 65 W TDP and the same AMD Socket AM4 platform.

Q: Which processor is better for a build without a discrete graphics card?

A: The AMD A10-9700 is the only viable choice of the two, because it has integrated Radeon R7 graphics. The Athlon X4 950 cannot output video on its own.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clean sweep for the AMD Athlon X4 950 across all five Cinebench tests. The largest relative win is a 1.3% advantage in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the Athlon scores 306 and the A10-9700 scores 302. The same 1.3% margin appears again in Cinebench R20 multi-core: 1277 for the Athlon versus 1261 for the A10.

Single-core results follow the same pattern with slightly smaller margins. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Athlon scores 180 against 178, a 1.1% lead. In Cinebench R23, the multi-core test shows 3041 versus 3004, a 1.2% margin, and the single-core test shows 429 versus 424, also a 1.2% margin. There is no recorded test where the A10-9700 wins.

These numbers place both processors in the same performance tier. The Athlon X4 950’s average benchmark score of 1047 puts it just 0.1% ahead of the AMD PRO A10-8770 and 0.2% ahead of the AMD PRO A10-9700. The A10-9700’s average score of 1034 places it 0.1% behind the AMD A10-7890K and 0.3% ahead of the Intel Pentium G4560. The head-to-head deltas are small enough that in real-world use, the difference between the two Bristol Ridge parts would be difficult to notice outside of synthetic benchmarks, but the Athlon’s consistent edge means it is the stronger CPU on paper.

Specification Differences

The two processors share nearly every core specification. Both use 4 cores and 4 threads, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and a boost clock of 3.80 GHz. The TDP is identical at 65 W, the socket is AMD Socket AM4 for both, and the memory support is the same: DDR4 with a dual-channel bus and 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth. Neither supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The first major difference is the integrated graphics. The A10-9700 includes a Radeon R7 unit, while the Athlon X4 950 has no integrated graphics at all. This is the defining distinction for system builders. The second difference is production status: the Athlon X4 950 is listed as Active, while the A10-9700 is listed as End-of-life. Both share the same part number format, with the Athlon carrying AD950XAGM44AB and the A10 carrying AD9700AGM44AB.

The release date is identical for both, July 26, 2017. The market segment is Desktop for both. The PCIe configuration is the same: Gen 3 with 8 lanes from the CPU. The memory bus, cache sizes, and all other listed specifications are identical between the two parts.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the same Excavator architecture with the Bristol Ridge codename. The process node is 28 nm, manufactured by GlobalFoundries. The transistor count is 3,100 million on a 250 mm² die. The cache hierarchy is identical: 320 KB of L1 cache and 2 MB of L2 cache, with no L3 cache present on either part.

The only architectural difference lies in what is integrated onto the silicon. The A10-9700 includes a Radeon R7 graphics core, making it an APU in AMD’s traditional sense, while the Athlon X4 950 is a CPU-only part with no graphics block. This difference does not affect the CPU core design, clock behavior, or memory controller, which is why the benchmark scores are so close. Both parts share the same generation branding, with the Athlon listed as “Athlon (Bristol Ridge)” and the A10 listed as “A10 (Bristol Ridge),” confirming that they are siblings from the same product family.

For a user comparing these two, the architecture story is simple: identical CPU silicon, one with graphics output and one without. The Athlon X4 950’s slight benchmark edge is likely due to the absence of the graphics block, which may allow marginally better power delivery to the CPU cores, but the recorded data does not specify a cause. The practical takeaway is that the A10-9700 is the integrated solution, while the Athlon X4 950 is the purer CPU part.