Ryzen 7 7840U vs Athlon X2 L310
Primary details
Comparing Athlon X2 L310 and Ryzen 7 7840U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | 371 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | 2x AMD Athlon | AMD Phoenix (Zen 4, Ryzen 7040) |
| Architecture codename | Conesus (2009) | Phoenix-U (Zen 4) |
| Release date | 10 September 2009 (14 years ago) | May 2023 (1 year ago) |
| Current price | $9.79 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Athlon X2 L310 and Ryzen 7 7840U 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) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 16 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.2 GHz | 5.1 GHz |
| Bus support | 800 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 256 KB | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 16 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 4 nm |
| Die size | no data | 178 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 95 °C | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 25,000 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon X2 L310 and Ryzen 7 7840U 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 | BGA / 638 lidless micro-PGA | FP8 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 13 Watt | 28 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon X2 L310 and Ryzen 7 7840U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, 3DNow, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, AMD64, Virtualization, Enhanced Virus Protection | no data |
| AES-NI | no data | + |
| AVX | no data | + |
| VirusProtect | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon X2 L310 and Ryzen 7 7840U are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon X2 L310 and Ryzen 7 7840U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR5-5600 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon 780M |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon X2 L310 and Ryzen 7 7840U.
| PCIe version | no data | 4.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 20 |
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Ryzen 7 7840U outperforms Athlon X2 L310 by 8068% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Ryzen 7 7840U outperforms Athlon X2 L310 by 1706% in GeekBench 5 Single-Core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Ryzen 7 7840U outperforms Athlon X2 L310 by 4275% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.
Benchmark coverage: 20%
Ryzen 7 7840U outperforms Athlon X2 L310 by 576% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.
Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Ryzen 7 7840U outperforms Athlon X2 L310 by 2103% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 19%
Ryzen 7 7840U outperforms Athlon X2 L310 by 1341% in 3DMark06 CPU.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 18%
Athlon X2 L310 outperforms Ryzen 7 7840U by 2873% in wPrime 32.
Pros & cons summary
| Physical cores | 2 | 8 |
| Threads | 2 | 16 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 4 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 13 Watt | 28 Watt |
We couldn't decide between Athlon X2 L310 and Ryzen 7 7840U. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon X2 L310 and Ryzen 7 7840U, 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.
