In Atomfall, the FX-9370 is slightly slower than the Ryzen Threadripper 1950X. We cannot compare value as at least one CPU is out of stock.
FX-9370
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
- Can run games without a dedicated GPU using its integrated graphics
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
- Up to 11% faster in Atomfall – 209 vs 189 FPS
- Up to 11% faster in Atomfall
- Is 4 years and 1 month newer – Aug 10, 2017 vs Jun 11, 2013
- Is 4 years and 1 month newer
- Consumes up to 18% less energy – 180 vs 220 Watts
- Consumes up to 18% less energy
Atomfall FPS Calculator
FX-9370 vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950X: Comparison of performance and price
All items are out of stock
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
Aug 10th, 2017
Average FPS
209 FPS
100%
Min 1% FPS
157 FPS
100%
Price, $
$850
100%
Value, $/FPS
$4.06/FPS
100%
Synthetic Benchmarks
The FX-9370 vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950X in synthetic CPU benchmarks
Performance Specifications
The FX-9370 vs Ryzen Threadripper 1950X in core CPU performance specifications
FX-9370
Jun 11th, 2013
Cores
8-core
50%
L3 Cache
8 MB
25%
Base Frequency
4.4 GHz
100%
Turbo Frequency
4.7 GHz
100%
Max. DDR3 RAM Speed
1866 MHz
70%
Ryzen Threadripper 1950X
Aug 10th, 2017
Cores
16-core
100%
L3 Cache
32 MB
100%
Base Frequency
3.4 GHz
77%
Turbo Frequency
4 GHz
85%
Max. DDR4 RAM Speed
2666 MHz
100%
Specifications
Comparison of core specifications
FX-9370 Jun 11th, 2013 | SpecificationsComparison of core specifications | Ryzen Threadripper 1950X Aug 10th, 2017 |
|---|---|---|
| General | ||
| Jun 11th, 2013 | Release Date | Aug 10th, 2017 |
| – | MSRP | $999.00 |
Desktop | Segment | Desktop |
| AM3+ | Socket | SP3r2 |
| 220W | Power Consumption | 180W |
| Other Features | ||
| 1866 MHz (DDR3) | RAM | 2666 MHz (DDR4) |
On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Integrated GPU | No Integrated Graphics |
| Overclockable | Overclock Support | Overclockable |
