Athlon X4 750 vs 3015e
Aggregate performance score
Athlon X4 750 outperforms 3015e by a small 5% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2389 | 2346 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD Raven Ridge (Ryzen 2000 APU) | no data |
| Power efficiency | 10.56 | 1.02 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Manufacturer | no data | GlobalFoundries |
| Architecture codename | Pollock (Zen) (2020) | Richland (2013−2014) |
| Release date | 4 August 2020 (5 years ago) | October 2013 (12 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
3015e and Athlon X4 750 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 1.2 GHz | 3.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.3 GHz | 4 GHz |
| L1 cache | 192 KB | 192K |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 4 MB |
| L3 cache | 4 MB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | no data | 246 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 74 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 1,303 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on 3015e and Athlon X4 750 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | no data | 1 |
| Socket | FT5 | FM2 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by 3015e and Athlon X4 750. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| PowerNow | - | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by 3015e and Athlon X4 750 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by 3015e and Athlon X4 750. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR3-1866 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon RX Vega 3 ( - 600 MHz) | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by 3015e and Athlon X4 750.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
Synthetic benchmarks
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.50 | 1.57 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 65 Watt |
3015e has a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 983.3% lower power consumption.
Athlon X4 750, on the other hand, has a 4.7% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between AMD 3015e and AMD Athlon X4 750.
Be aware that 3015e is a notebook processor while Athlon X4 750 is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
