i3-330UM vs Athlon 64 X2 TK-53

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
Athlon 64 2700+ Athlon 64 L110 Athlon 64 TF-20 Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 Athlon 64 X2 TK-57
VS
Core i3-330M Core i3-350M Core i3-370M Core i3-380M Core i5-430M Core i5-460M Core i5-480M Core i5-520M Core i5-560M Core i7-620M Core i7-640M Pentium P6200

Aggregate performance score

Athlon 64 X2 TK-53
2 cores / 2 threads, 31 Watt
0.35
Core i3-330UM
2010
2 cores / 4 threads, 18 Watt
0.35

Contents

Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 Athlon 64 X2 TK-53
i3-330UM i3-330UM

Primary details

Comparing Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 and Core i3-330UM processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking30433047
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Series2x Athlon 64Intel Core i3
Power efficiency1.071.84
Architecture codenameHawk-256Arrandale (2010−2011)
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)24 May 2010 (14 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 and Core i3-330UM 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads24
Base clock speedno data1.2 GHz
Boost clock speed1.7 GHz0.1 GHz
Bus typeno dataDMI 1.0
Bus rate667 MHz1 × 2.5 GT/s
Multiplierno data9
L1 cacheno data128 KB
L2 cacheno data512 KB
L3 cacheno data3 MB
Chip lithography65 nm32 nm
Die sizeno data81+114 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Number of transistorsno data382+177 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 and Core i3-330UM 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 configurationno data1 (Uniprocessor)
Socketno dataBGA1288
Power consumption (TDP)31 Watt18 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 and Core i3-330UM. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2
FMA-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Flex Memory Accessno data+
PAEno data36 Bit
FDIno data+
Fast Memory Accessno data+

Security technologies

Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 and Core i3-330UM technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 and Core i3-330UM are enumerated here.

VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 and Core i3-330UM. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data12.799 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel® HD Graphics for Previous Generation Intel® Processors
Clear Videono data+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data500 MHz

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 and Core i3-330UM integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 and Core i3-330UM.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

Synthetic benchmark performance

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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 0.35
i3-330UM 0.35

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.

Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 558
+0.5%
i3-330UM 555

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 167
i3-330UM 189
+13.2%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 307
i3-330UM 422
+37.5%

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 1187
i3-330UM 1301
+9.6%

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 47.3
i3-330UM 42.73
+10.7%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary

Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 65 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 31 Watt 18 Watt

i3-330UM has 100% more threads, a 103.1% more advanced lithography process, and 72.2% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 and Core i3-330UM.

Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 and Core i3-330UM, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.

AMD Athlon 64 X2 TK-53
Athlon 64 X2 TK-53
Intel Core i3-330UM
Core i3-330UM
Like
Like

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.

Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 Athlon 64 X2 TK-53
vs
Pentium T2370 Pentium T2370
i3-330UM Core i3 330UM
vs
Core 2 Duo SU7300 Core 2 Duo SU7300
Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 Athlon 64 X2 TK-53
vs
Core 2 Duo T5250 Core 2 Duo T5250
Pentium Dual T2370 Pentium Dual Core T2370
vs
E1-2200 E1 2200
E-300 E 300
vs
Pentium Dual T2080 Pentium Dual Core T2080
A4-1200 A4 1200
vs
Duo L2300 Core Duo L2300
Turion 64 X2 TL-58 Turion 64 X2 TL-58
vs
Pentium 967 Pentium 967
Turion 64 X2 TL-56 Turion 64 X2 TL-56
vs
Pentium 967 Pentium 967
E-300 E 300
vs
Pentium Dual T2060 Pentium Dual Core T2060
Core 2 Duo SU7300 Core 2 Duo SU7300
vs
Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 Athlon 64 X2 TK-53
Turion II Neo K625 Turion II Neo K625
vs
Celeron N3000 Celeron N3000
Turion 64 X2 TL-50 Turion 64 X2 TL-50
vs
Core 2 Duo T5300 Core 2 Duo T5300
Athlon Neo X2 L335 Athlon Neo X2 L335
vs
Core 2 Duo T5300 Core 2 Duo T5300

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.

3.6 8 votes

Rate Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
1.4 7 votes

Rate Core i3-330UM on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon 64 X2 TK-53 or Core i3-330UM, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.