Pentium M 715 vs Athlon 64 X2 TK-55
Aggregate performance score
Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 outperforms Pentium M 715 by a whopping 106% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 and Pentium M 715 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3074 | 3286 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | 2x Athlon 64 | Pentium M |
| Power efficiency | 1.01 | 0.72 |
| Architecture codename | Taylor / Hawk-256 | Dothan (2004−2005) |
| Release date | no data (2024 years ago) | 23 June 2004 (20 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 and Pentium M 715 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.5 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.8 GHz | 1.5 GHz |
| Bus rate | 667 MHz | 400 MHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 32 KB |
| L2 cache | no data | 2 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | no data | 87 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 144 million |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| VID voltage range | no data | 0.988V-1.34V |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 and Pentium M 715 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 | no data | PPGA478 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 31 Watt | 7.5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 and Pentium M 715. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | - |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| PAE | no data | 32 Bit |
| FSB parity | no data | - |
Security technologies
Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 and Pentium M 715 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 and Pentium M 715 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | no data | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 and Pentium M 715. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR2 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.33 | 0.16 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 31 Watt | 7 Watt |
Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 has a 106.3% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 38.5% more advanced lithography process.
Pentium M 715, on the other hand, has 342.9% lower power consumption.
The Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 is our recommended choice as it beats the Pentium M 715 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 and Pentium M 715, 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.
