Key Differences
In short, we have a clear winner — Core i5-11600K outperforms the more expensive Phenom X4 9550 on the selected game parameters, and is also a better bang for your buck! The better performing Core i5-11600K is 4737 days newer than the more expensive Phenom X4 9550.
Advantages of AMD Phenom X4 9550
- Consumes up to 24% less energy than Intel Core i5-11600K - 95 vs 125 Watts
Advantages of Intel Core i5-11600K
- Performs up to 39% better in Minecraft than Phenom X4 9550 - 802 vs 578 FPS
- Up to 0% cheaper than Phenom X4 9550 - $138.2 vs $138.89
- Up to 30% better value when playing Minecraft than Phenom X4 9550 - $0.19 vs $0.27 per FPS
- Can execute more multi-threaded tasks simultaneously than AMD Phenom X4 9550 - 12 vs 4 threads
Minecraft
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Desktop • Mar 27th, 2008
FPS
578
72.06982543640898%
Value, €/FPS
€0.27/FPS
70.37037037037037%
Price, €
€154.17
99%
Buy for €154.17 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 180 minutes ago
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
FPS
802
100%
Value, €/FPS
€0.19/FPS
100%
Price, €
€153.4
100%
FPS and Value Winner
Buy for €153.4 on Amazon
In Stock
Updated 181 minutes ago
TOP 5 Games
Resolution
1920 x 1080
Game Graphics
High
Desktop • Mar 27th, 2008
Desktop • Mar 16th, 2021
Geekbench 5 Benchmarks
Desktop • Mar 27th, 2008
Single-Core
234
10.704483074107959%
Multi-Core
712
8.299335586898241%
AMD Phenom X4 9550 | vs | Intel Core i5-11600K |
---|---|---|
Mar 27th, 2008 | Release Date | Mar 16th, 2021 |
Phenom X4 | Collection | Core i5 |
Agena | Codename | Rocket Lake |
AMD Socket AM2+ | Socket | Intel Socket 1200 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
4 | Cores | 6 |
4 | Threads | 12 |
2.2 GHz | Base Clock Speed | 3.9 GHz |
Non-Turbo | Turbo Clock Speed | 4.9 GHz |
95 W | TDP | 125 W |
65 nm | Process Size | 14 nm |
11.0x | Multiplier | 39.0x |
On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 750 |
No | Overclockable | Yes |