AMD Athlon X4 830 vs AMD FX-8800P Comparison

The AMD Athlon X4 830 and AMD FX-8800P are two end-of-life processors from the same manufacturer, yet they target entirely different market segments. The Athlon X4 830 is a desktop part built on the Steamroller architecture (Kaveri), while the FX-8800P is a mobile chip using the newer Excavator architecture (Carrizo). The data available shows a remarkably close contest in raw CPU benchmarks, with the desktop part edging ahead in every single test, but the mobile part bringing integrated graphics and a dramatically lower TDP to the table. This comparison hinges on whether the small performance lead of the Athlon or the feature set and efficiency of the FX matters more for a potential user.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results paint a picture of extreme parity, with the AMD Athlon X4 830 winning all five head-to-head Cinebench comparisons, but by very narrow margins. In the Cinebench R15 multicore test, the Athlon scores 248 against the FX-8800P's 242, a delta of 2.5%. This pattern holds across the board. The Cinebench R20 multicore test shows the Athlon at 1035 and the FX at 1010, again a 2.5% difference. The single-core results are slightly more pronounced in the Athlon's favor. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the Athlon scores 146 versus 142, a 2.8% lead, and in Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 348 versus 339, a 2.7% advantage.

The Cinebench R23 multicore test, often considered a more modern and demanding workload, shows the Athlon at 2465 and the FX at 2407, a 2.4% difference. These deltas are so small that they fall well within the range of normal run-to-run variance for benchmark software. The data implies that for pure CPU compute, the two processors are functionally equivalent in performance, despite their architectural differences. The Athlon's consistent, albeit tiny, lead suggests a slight edge in sustained performance, likely attributable to its higher 3.00 GHz base clock and desktop-oriented power envelope. The FX-8800P's only additional benchmark, Geekbench, shows a multicore score of 1234 and a single-core score of 524, but no comparable data exists for the Athlon, making a direct comparison in that test impossible.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the benchmark wins, the AMD Athlon X4 830 is the clear winner in CPU-centric tasks. It takes all five head-to-head victories, meaning it is technically faster in both single-threaded and multi-threaded Cinebench workloads. For a user building a desktop system where the CPU's processing power is the primary concern, the data suggests the Athlon is the marginally better choice. The wins are consistent, even if the margins are slim, indicating that the Athlon's architecture and higher base clock provide a small but reliable performance advantage in these rendering and compute tasks.

The AMD FX-8800P, while losing all CPU benchmarks, wins in the broader feature comparison. Its integrated Radeon R7 8CU graphics is a significant inclusion that the Athlon X4 830 completely lacks. This means the FX-8800P is the only one of the two that can power a display without a discrete graphics card. For a mobile or compact system where space and power are at a premium, this is a decisive advantage. The FX-8800P's victory is not in raw CPU performance, but in its ability to function as a complete system-on-a-chip. The data shows that it sacrifices a tiny amount of compute performance for a substantial increase in integration and a massive reduction in power draw.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent two successive generations of AMD's modular CPU design, but they take different approaches. The Athlon X4 830 is built on the Steamroller architecture, which is the second iteration of the modular design that followed the original Bulldozer. The FX-8800P uses the newer Excavator architecture, which is a further refinement of the same fundamental concept. Both are fabricated on a 28nm process node at GlobalFoundries, and both have four cores and four threads. This means they are architecturally similar in their core count and threading model, but the execution cores themselves are different generations.

A key difference lies in their cache configurations. The Athlon X4 830 has a 256 KB L1 cache and a 4 MB L2 cache. The FX-8800P has a larger 320 KB L1 cache, but its L2 cache is listed as "1 MB (per module)". Given that the FX-8800P has four cores, this likely translates to a total of 2 MB of L2 cache, which is half of what the Athlon offers. This reduction in L2 cache is a likely contributor to the FX-8800P's slightly lower benchmark scores. The FX-8800P also has significantly more transistors, 3,100 million compared to the Athlon's 2,411 million, despite a similar die size of 250 mm² versus 245 mm². The extra transistors in the FX-8800P are largely dedicated to its integrated Radeon R7 graphics and other power management features.

Specification Differences

The specification sheets for these two CPUs highlight their divergent purposes. The most striking difference is in their TDP. The AMD Athlon X4 830 has a 65W TDP, while the AMD FX-8800P is rated at just 15W. This is a massive disparity and underscores the FX-8800P's mobile design goal of minimizing power consumption and heat generation. The Athlon's higher TDP allows it to maintain a 3.00 GHz base clock, while the FX-8800P has a much lower base clock of 2.10 GHz. Interestingly, both processors have the same 3.40 GHz boost clock, suggesting the FX-8800P can reach similar peak performance but only for short bursts.

The socket and market segment also differ completely. The Athlon X4 830 uses the AMD Socket FM2+ and is a desktop part, while the FX-8800P uses the AMD Socket FP4 and is a mobile part. This means they are not interchangeable in any system. The Athlon has an unlocked multiplier, making it overclockable, while the FX-8800P's multiplier is locked. The Athlon also offers more PCIe lanes, with Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only), compared to the FX-8800P's Gen 3, 8 Lanes (CPU only). The FX-8800P is the only one with integrated graphics (Radeon R7 8CU), and it was released on 2015-06-01, while the Athlon's release date is not listed. Both support dual-channel DDR3 memory with a bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s, and neither supports ECC memory.

FAQ

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

A: The AMD Athlon X4 830 is faster, scoring 2465 compared to the AMD FX-8800P's 2407, a 2.4% difference.

Q: Does the AMD FX-8800P have integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the AMD FX-8800P includes Radeon R7 8CU integrated graphics, whereas the AMD Athlon X4 830 has no integrated graphics.

Q: What is the difference in power consumption between the two?

A: The AMD Athlon X4 830 has a TDP of 65W, while the AMD FX-8800P has a TDP of just 15W.

Q: Can the AMD Athlon X4 830 be overclocked?

A: Yes, the AMD Athlon X4 830 has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD FX-8800P does not, as its multiplier is locked.

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

A: The AMD Athlon X4 830 has an average benchmark score of 848, and the AMD FX-8800P has an average benchmark score of 843.

Q: How does the AMD FX-8800P compare to the Intel Core i7-920?

A: The AMD FX-8800P has an average score of 843, which is 0.3% higher than the Intel Core i7-920's average score of 840.

The Verdict

The choice between these two processors is dictated entirely by the intended use case. The data shows the AMD Athlon X4 830 is the superior choice for a desktop user who already has a discrete graphics card and wants the best possible CPU performance. It wins every single head-to-head benchmark, boasts a larger L2 cache, and has a higher base clock. Its unlocked multiplier is also a bonus for enthusiasts who are comfortable overclocking. The small performance lead, while not transformative, is consistent and free, as the Athlon achieves it without sacrificing any features the user likely needs.

The AMD FX-8800P is the clear winner for a compact, low-power, or mobile system. Its 15W TDP is a fraction of the Athlon's 65W, making it far more suitable for thin-and-light laptops or passively cooled systems. The inclusion of Radeon R7 integrated graphics means it is a complete platform on its own, requiring no additional hardware for basic display output. The performance deficit is minuscule, with the FX-8800P trailing the Athlon by roughly 2.5% in most tests. For a user who prioritizes efficiency and integration over raw compute speed, the FX-8800P is the logical choice. The data indicates that the Athlon X4 830 is a slightly faster CPU, but the FX-8800P is a more versatile and efficient platform.