Athlon Silver 3050e vs i5-760
Aggregate performance score
Athlon Silver 3050e outperforms Core i5-760 by a moderate 12% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i5-760 and Athlon Silver 3050e processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2066 | 1986 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.11 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | AMD Raven Ridge (Ryzen 2000 APU) |
| Power efficiency | 1.65 | 29.26 |
| Architecture codename | Lynnfield (2009−2010) | Dali (Zen) (2020) |
| Release date | 18 July 2010 (14 years ago) | 1 June 2020 (4 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $230 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Core i5-760 and Athlon Silver 3050e 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 1.4 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.33 GHz | 2.8 GHz |
| Bus rate | 2.5 GT/s | no data |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 192 KB |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 8 MB (shared) | 4 MB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 296 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 73 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 774 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Core i5-760 and Athlon Silver 3050e 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 | no data |
| Socket | FCLGA1156,LGA1156 | FP5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 6 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i5-760 and Athlon Silver 3050e. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.2 | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| FMA | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | 1.0 | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| PAE | 36 Bit | no data |
Security technologies
Core i5-760 and Athlon Silver 3050e 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 Core i5-760 and Athlon Silver 3050e are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i5-760 and Athlon Silver 3050e. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4 |
| Maximum memory size | 16 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 21 GB/s | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon RX Vega 3 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i5-760 and Athlon Silver 3050e.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | no data |
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.
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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.69 | 1.89 |
| Recency | 18 July 2010 | 1 June 2020 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 6 Watt |
i5-760 has 100% more physical cores.
Athlon Silver 3050e, on the other hand, has a 11.8% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 1483.3% lower power consumption.
The Athlon Silver 3050e is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i5-760 in performance tests.
Note that Core i5-760 is a desktop processor while Athlon Silver 3050e is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i5-760 and Athlon Silver 3050e, 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.
