FX-6330 vs C-70
Primary details
Comparing C-70 and FX-6330 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 1676 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD C-Series | no data |
| Power efficiency | no data | 2.11 |
| Architecture codename | Ontario (2011−2012) | Vishera (2012−2015) |
| Release date | 1 September 2012 (12 years ago) | 15 December 2015 (8 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
C-70 and FX-6330 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 | 1 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.33 GHz | 4.2 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 288 KB |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 6 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 8 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 75 mm2 | 315 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 1,200 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on C-70 and FX-6330 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 | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | FT1 BGA 413-Ball | AM3+ |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 9 Watt | 125 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by C-70 and FX-6330. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-V, Radeon HD 6290 (276-400 MHz) | no data |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| FMA | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by C-70 and FX-6330 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by C-70 and FX-6330. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 Single-channel | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon HD 6290 | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by C-70 and FX-6330.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
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 September 2012 | 15 December 2015 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 6 |
| Threads | 2 | 6 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 9 Watt | 125 Watt |
C-70 has 1288.9% lower power consumption.
FX-6330, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, 200% more physical cores and 200% more threads, and a 25% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between C-70 and FX-6330. We've got no test results to judge.
Be aware that C-70 is a notebook processor while FX-6330 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between C-70 and FX-6330, 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.
