Opteron 4334 vs Athlon 64 X2 TK-42
Primary details
Comparing Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 and Opteron 4334 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 1721 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | 2x AMD Athlon 64 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Tyler (2007−2009) | Seoul (2012) |
| Release date | 1 November 2009 (14 years ago) | 4 December 2012 (11 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 and Opteron 4334 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) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 6 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 3.5 GHz |
| Bus rate | 1600 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 0 MB | 288 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 6144 KB |
| L3 cache | no data | 8192 KB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | no data | 315 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 95 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 1,200 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 and Opteron 4334 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 | 2 |
| Socket | Socket S1 | C32 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 20 Watt | 95 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 and Opteron 4334. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 86x Enhanced Virus Protection (EVP), MMX, PowerNow, SSE3,-64, Enhanced 3DNow | no data |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| FMA | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 and Opteron 4334 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 and Opteron 4334. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 November 2009 | 4 December 2012 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 6 |
| Threads | 2 | 6 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 20 Watt | 95 Watt |
Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 has 375% lower power consumption.
Opteron 4334, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, 200% more physical cores and 200% more threads, and a 103.1% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 and Opteron 4334. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 is a notebook processor while Opteron 4334 is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 and Opteron 4334, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
