AMD FX-8800P vs AMD PRO A10-8750B Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data splits this comparison into two distinct narratives. In Cinebench workloads, the AMD PRO A10-8750B consistently takes the lead, while the AMD FX-8800P dominates Geekbench. The PRO A10-8750B wins five of the seven recorded tests, but the margins in its victories are narrow, whereas the FX-8800P’s wins are substantial.

Starting with the Cinebench suite, the PRO A10-8750B shows a uniform advantage. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 254 against the FX-8800P’s 242, a delta of 4.7%. The same 4.7% gap appears in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the PRO A10-8750B posts 1060 versus 1010. Single-core results follow the same pattern: Cinebench R20 single-core shows 149 for the PRO A10-8750B and 142 for the FX-8800P, again a 4.7% difference. Cinebench R23 multicore gives the PRO A10-8750B 2525 against 2407, and Cinebench R23 single-core gives it 356 versus 339, a slightly larger 4.8% gap. These are consistent, predictable margins, indicating the PRO A10-8750B’s higher clock speeds provide a steady advantage in rendering tasks.

The Geekbench results tell the opposite story. In Geekbench multicore, the FX-8800P scores 1234, which is 25.3% higher than the PRO A10-8750B’s 985. The single-core Geekbench test is even more lopsided: the FX-8800P scores 524 versus 416, a 26% advantage. These are large deltas, far exceeding the Cinebench margins. The FX-8800P’s architecture appears to handle the Geekbench workload significantly better, despite its lower clock speeds.

The average benchmark score reflects this split. The FX-8800P averages 843 across all tests, while the PRO A10-8750B averages 821. This puts the FX-8800P ahead by roughly 2.7% overall, despite losing the majority of individual tests. The PRO A10-8750B’s nearest rival in the database is the AMD A10 PRO-7850B, which scores 828, meaning the PRO A10-8750B is 0.8% behind that chip. The FX-8800P’s nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-3520M at 843 (a 0% delta) and the Intel Core i7-920 at 840 (0.3% higher).

Where Each One Wins

The use-case split is clear from the data. The AMD PRO A10-8750B is the stronger choice for sustained multi-threaded rendering workloads, as evidenced by its victories across all four Cinebench tests. These tests stress the CPU with ray tracing and rendering tasks, and the PRO A10-8750B’s higher base clock of 3.60 GHz and boost clock of 4.00 GHz translate directly into better scores. The consistent 4.7% to 4.8% margins suggest that the PRO A10-8750B’s clock speed advantage is the deciding factor in these workloads.

The AMD FX-8800P wins decisively in Geekbench, which is a more general-purpose benchmark that includes integer, floating-point, and memory tests. Its 25.3% multicore advantage and 26% single-core advantage are too large to ignore. The FX-8800P’s Excavator architecture, despite its lower clocks (2.10 GHz base, 3.40 GHz boost), appears to execute the Geekbench instruction mix more efficiently. This makes the FX-8800P the better option for general productivity applications that follow a Geekbench-like pattern, such as web browsing, office work, and light content creation.

For users prioritizing rendering or video encoding, the PRO A10-8750B’s Cinebench wins make it the safer pick. For users running a diverse mix of everyday software, the FX-8800P’s Geekbench dominance suggests better real-world responsiveness. The average benchmark score, which weights all tests equally, favors the FX-8800P at 843 versus 821, so the database’s overall metric leans toward the mobile chip.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different AMD generations and target different market segments. The AMD FX-8800P is built on the Excavator architecture with the Carrizo codename, while the AMD PRO A10-8750B uses the older Steamroller architecture with the Godaveri codename. Both are fabricated on a 28 nm process at GlobalFoundries, but the transistor counts differ: the FX-8800P packs 3,100 million transistors on a 250 mm² die, while the PRO A10-8750B has 2,411 million transistors on a 245 mm² die. The FX-8800P’s higher transistor density reflects its newer design.

Core and thread counts are identical: both have 4 cores and 4 threads. The cache layouts diverge significantly. The FX-8800P has 320 KB of L1 cache and 1 MB of L2 cache per module, which totals 2 MB across two modules. The PRO A10-8750B has 256 KB of L1 cache and a single 4 MB L2 cache pool. Neither chip has L3 cache. The FX-8800P’s per-module L2 design is typical of AMD’s modular approach, while the PRO A10-8750B’s larger unified L2 may help with certain workloads.

Clock speeds strongly favor the PRO A10-8750B. Its base clock is 3.60 GHz and boost clock is 4.00 GHz, compared to the FX-8800P’s 2.10 GHz base and 3.40 GHz boost. This explains the PRO A10-8750B’s Cinebench wins. However, the FX-8800P compensates with a much lower thermal design power: 15 watts versus 95 watts. This makes the FX-8800P suitable for mobile platforms, as reflected in its AMD Socket FP4 and Mobile market segment, while the PRO A10-8750B uses the desktop AMD Socket FM2+.

Memory support is similar: both use DDR3 with dual-channel memory buses and 34.1 GB/s of bandwidth, and neither supports ECC memory. PCI Express connectivity differs, with the FX-8800P offering Gen 3 with 8 lanes (CPU only) and the PRO A10-8750B offering Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics are present on both, with the FX-8800P featuring a Radeon R7 8CU and the PRO A10-8750B featuring a Radeon R7, though the database does not list core counts for the latter. The FX-8800P’s release date is June 2015, while the PRO A10-8750B launched in September 2015. Both are end-of-life products.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward decision based on workload. For Cinebench-style rendering tasks, the AMD PRO A10-8750B is the clear winner. It leads by 4.7% in four of five Cinebench tests and by 4.8% in the fifth, providing a reliable edge for any CPU-bound rendering workload. Its higher clock speeds, 3.60 GHz base and 4.00 GHz boost, are the obvious explanation. Users running video encoding, 3D rendering, or batch photo processing should favor the PRO A10-8750B.

For general-purpose computing, the AMD FX-8800P is the better choice. Its Geekbench multicore score of 1234 is 25.3% higher than the PRO A10-8750B’s 985, and its single-core score of 524 is 26% higher. These are dominant margins that outweigh the PRO A10-8750B’s Cinebench wins. The FX-8800P also has the higher average benchmark score at 843 versus 821, indicating that across the full test suite, it performs better on average. Additionally, its 15-watt TDP versus 95 watts makes it far more efficient, which is critical for mobile use.

The architecture split explains the divergent results. The FX-8800P’s Excavator design, despite lower clocks, executes Geekbench workloads much faster. The PRO A10-8750B’s Steamroller design relies on clock speed to win Cinebench. For a desktop system where rendering is the primary task, the PRO A10-8750B is the sensible pick. For a laptop or any system running diverse applications, the FX-8800P offers superior general performance and efficiency. The database’s percentile ranking places both at the 22nd percentile among all CPUs, meaning neither is a high-performance part, but within this comparison, the FX-8800P’s average score edges ahead.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD FX-8800P has an average benchmark score of 843, while the AMD PRO A10-8750B scores 821.

Q: How large is the FX-8800P’s lead in Geekbench multicore?

A: The FX-8800P scores 1234 in Geekbench multicore, which is 25.3% higher than the PRO A10-8750B’s 985.

Q: What is the closest rival to the PRO A10-8750B in the database?

A: The AMD A10 PRO-7850B is the nearest rival, with an average score of 828, putting the PRO A10-8750B 0.8% behind it.

Q: Which CPU has more L2 cache?

A: The AMD PRO A10-8750B has 4 MB of L2 cache, while the AMD FX-8800P has 1 MB per module, totaling 2 MB across two modules.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two chips?

A: The FX-8800P has a TDP of 15 watts, while the PRO A10-8750B has a TDP of 95 watts.

Q: How many Cinebench tests does the PRO A10-8750B win?

A: The PRO A10-8750B wins all five Cinebench tests, with margins of 4.7% in four tests and 4.8% in the fifth.