AMD A8-7680 vs AMD Athlon X4 950 Comparison

The AMD Athlon X4 950 and AMD A8-7680 are two quad-core desktop processors built on the same 28 nm Excavator architecture, but they target different platforms and offer a clear split in capabilities. Both chips share identical core counts, clock speeds, and cache configurations, making their benchmark results nearly inseparable. However, the data reveals a consistent, albeit narrow, edge for the Athlon X4 950 across every tested workload, while the A8-7680 counters with a lower TDP and integrated graphics. This analysis breaks down the numbers to determine which processor fits which build.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are remarkably close, with the Athlon X4 950 winning all five head-to-head tests by a margin of roughly one percent or less. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Athlon X4 950 scores 306 against the A8-7680’s 303, a 1% advantage. That pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the Athlon X4 950 posts 1277 versus 1264, again a 1% lead. The single-core results tell the same story: in Cinebench R20 single-core, the Athlon X4 950 scores 180 to the A8-7680’s 178, a 1.1% difference, and in Cinebench R23 single-core, the gap is 429 to 425, a 0.9% edge.

The largest relative win for the Athlon X4 950 comes in the single-core R20 test, where it leads by 1.1%. In every other test, the delta is exactly 1% or slightly below. These are not the kind of margins that change real-world application behavior; they are within the noise of run-to-run variation for most workloads. The average benchmark scores confirm the overall picture: the Athlon X4 950 averages 1047, while the A8-7680 averages 1036, placing the Athlon X4 950 just 1.1% higher overall. Both chips land in the bottom third of all CPUs, with the Athlon X4 950 at the 29th percentile and the A8-7680 at the 28th percentile.

Looking at the nearest rivals helps contextualize these scores. The Athlon X4 950 sits essentially level with the AMD PRO A10-8770 and Intel Core i5-6350HQ, both of which average 1046, and it is just 0.2% ahead of the AMD PRO A10-9700 and Intel Pentium Gold G5620, both at 1045. The A8-7680’s closest competitor is the Intel Core i7-4558U, which averages 1038 and is 0.2% faster, while the AMD A10-7890K trails by 0.1% at 1035. In short, neither chip has a meaningful performance advantage over the other; the Athlon X4 950 wins every benchmark but by margins that would be imperceptible in daily use.

The Verdict

From the data alone, the AMD Athlon X4 950 is the faster processor, winning all five head-to-head benchmarks and holding a 1.1% higher average score. If raw compute performance is the only criterion, the choice is clear: the Athlon X4 950. Its multi-core Cinebench R23 score of 3041 versus 3011 and single-core score of 429 versus 425 give it a clean sweep, even if the practical difference is minimal.

However, the A8-7680 is not without its arguments. It carries a 45 W TDP compared to the Athlon X4 950’s 65 W, a 20-watt difference that makes it a better fit for compact or low-power builds where heat and energy draw matter more than a 1% benchmark gap. The A8-7680 also includes integrated Radeon R7 graphics, while the Athlon X4 950 has no integrated graphics at all. For a system that will rely on the CPU’s built-in display output, the A8-7680 is the only viable option between the two. The platform choice also factors in: the Athlon X4 950 uses AMD Socket AM4 with DDR4 memory, while the A8-7680 uses the older AMD Socket FM2+ with DDR3. If you are building new, AM4 offers a more modern foundation; if you are upgrading an existing FM2+ system, the A8-7680 is the drop-in choice.

The verdict depends on priorities. For pure CPU performance, pick the Athlon X4 950. For a lower-power system with integrated graphics, pick the A8-7680. The benchmark data does not support calling either a clear winner for general use; the 1% differences are negligible.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the same 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries, with identical transistor counts of 3,100 million and die sizes of 250 mm². They share the same Excavator architecture, but the codenames differ: the Athlon X4 950 is Bristol Ridge, while the A8-7680 is Carrizo. This is a minor distinction, as both are derivatives of the same design philosophy.

The most significant architectural divergence is the memory controller. The Athlon X4 950 supports DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus and a theoretical bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The A8-7680 supports DDR3 with a dual-channel bus and a bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. That 3.3 GB/s bandwidth difference is the largest measurable architectural gap between the two and likely contributes to the Athlon X4 950’s slightly higher benchmark scores, though the effect is small.

The integrated graphics situation is another key difference. The A8-7680 includes Radeon R7 graphics, making it an APU in the traditional sense. The Athlon X4 950 has no integrated graphics, which means it requires a discrete GPU for any display output. This is not an architectural change to the CPU cores themselves, but it fundamentally changes the platform requirements.

PCIe support also differs. The Athlon X4 950 lists PCIe Gen 3 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the A8-7680 lists PCIe Gen 3 without a lane count specification. For most desktop uses, this likely means similar expansion capability, but the lane limit on the Athlon X4 950 could constrain multi-GPU or heavy expansion setups. Both chips have 320 KB of L1 cache and 2 MB of L2 cache, with no L3 cache on either.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets show a handful of differences between the two chips. The most obvious is the TDP: the Athlon X4 950 is rated at 65 W, while the A8-7680 is rated at 45 W. This is a substantial difference that affects cooling requirements and power consumption.

The socket is another clear divider. The Athlon X4 950 uses AMD Socket AM4, while the A8-7680 uses AMD Socket FM2+. These are physically incompatible, so the choice of processor dictates the motherboard. Memory support follows the socket: the Athlon X4 950 runs DDR4, and the A8-7680 runs DDR3. The memory bandwidth figures reflect this, with the Athlon X4 950 offering 38.4 GB/s against the A8-7680’s 34.1 GB/s.

Integrated graphics is present only on the A8-7680, which includes Radeon R7. The Athlon X4 950 lists no integrated graphics. PCIe configuration also differs, with the Athlon X4 950 specifying Gen 3 with 8 lanes (CPU only) and the A8-7680 specifying simply Gen 3. The release dates are also different: the Athlon X4 950 launched on July 26, 2017, while the A8-7680 launched on October 25, 2018, over a year later. Both are listed as active production parts, and neither has a launch MSRP in the data.

FAQ

Q: Is the AMD Athlon X4 950 faster than the AMD A8-7680 in multi-core workloads?

A: Yes, but only marginally. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Athlon X4 950 scores 3041 versus the A8-7680’s 3011, a 1% difference. The same 1% edge appears in Cinebench R15 multi-core (306 vs 303) and Cinebench R20 multi-core (1277 vs 1264).

Q: Which CPU has a lower power draw?

A: The AMD A8-7680 has a TDP of 45 W, while the AMD Athlon X4 950 has a TDP of 65 W. The A8-7680 is the more power-efficient part by a 20 W margin.

Q: Can I use the AMD Athlon X4 950 without a dedicated graphics card?

A: No. The Athlon X4 950 has no integrated graphics, so a discrete GPU is required for display output. The A8-7680 includes Radeon R7 integrated graphics and can run without a dedicated card.

Q: Do both CPUs support the same memory type?

A: No. The Athlon X4 950 supports DDR4 with a bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, while the A8-7680 supports DDR3 with a bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. Both use dual-channel memory buses.

Q: Are the benchmark differences between these two CPUs significant for real-world use?

A: The data shows the Athlon X4 950 winning by 0.9% to 1.1% across all tests, with an average score 1.1% higher. These margins are negligible for most applications and would be difficult to perceive outside of synthetic benchmarks.

Q: Which CPU is newer?

A: The AMD A8-7680 was released on October 25, 2018, while the AMD Athlon X4 950 was released on July 26, 2017. Despite being newer, the A8-7680 does not outperform the Athlon X4 950 in any benchmark.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Athlon X4 950 wins on every CPU benchmark in the data. It is 1% ahead in Cinebench R15 multi-core, 1% ahead in Cinebench R20 multi-core, 1.1% ahead in Cinebench R20 single-core, 1% ahead in Cinebench R23 multi-core, and 0.9% ahead in Cinebench R23 single-core. Its average benchmark score of 1047 places it at the 29th percentile of all CPUs, one point above the A8-7680’s 28th percentile. If you are building a system where the processor’s raw compute is the sole focus, the Athlon X4 950 is the pick. It also offers the modern AM4 platform with DDR4 memory support, which can be an advantage for future upgrades or compatibility with newer components.

The AMD A8-7680 wins where the data shows it: power efficiency and integrated graphics. Its 45 W TDP is 20 W lower than the Athlon X4 950’s 65 W, making it the better choice for small form factor builds, media center PCs, or any system where keeping heat and power consumption down is a priority. The inclusion of Radeon R7 integrated graphics means the A8-7680 can power a display without a discrete GPU, which is a decisive advantage for basic office machines or budget home theater setups. Its FM2+ socket and DDR3 support cater to users upgrading an older system rather than building fresh. In terms of performance, the A8-7680 does not win a single benchmark, but its platform flexibility and lower power envelope give it a distinct use case that the Athlon X4 950 cannot match.