Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 vs Pentium 4 P4 3.0

VS

Aggregate performance score

Pentium 4 P4 3.0
1 core / 1 thread, 89 Watt
0.21
Athlon 64 X2 TK-55
2 cores / 2 threads, 31 Watt
0.33
+57.1%

Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 outperforms Pentium 4 P4 3.0 by an impressive 57% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Pentium 4 P4 3.0 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31973075
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
SeriesPentium 42x Athlon 64
Power efficiency0.221.01
Architecture codenameNorthwood (2002−2004)Taylor / Hawk-256
Release dateno data (2024 years ago)no data (2024 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Pentium 4 P4 3.0 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 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 cores1 (Single-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads12
Boost clock speed3 GHz1.8 GHz
Bus rate400 MHz667 MHz
Chip lithography130 nm65 nm
64 bit support-+
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Pentium 4 P4 3.0 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 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.

Power consumption (TDP)89 Watt31 Watt

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.

Pentium 4 P4 3.0 0.21
Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 0.33
+57.1%

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.

Pentium 4 P4 3.0 811
Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 1316
+62.3%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.21 0.33
Physical cores 1 2
Threads 1 2
Chip lithography 130 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 89 Watt 31 Watt

Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 has a 57.1% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 187.1% lower power consumption.

The Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 is our recommended choice as it beats the Pentium 4 P4 3.0 in performance tests.

Note that Pentium 4 P4 3.0 is a desktop processor while Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Pentium 4 P4 3.0 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-55, 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.


Intel Pentium 4 P4 3.0
Pentium 4 P4 3.0
AMD Athlon 64 X2 TK-55
Athlon 64 X2 TK-55

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.

Community ratings

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


3.2 281 vote

Rate Pentium 4 P4 3.0 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 27 votes

Rate Athlon 64 X2 TK-55 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Pentium 4 P4 3.0 or Athlon 64 X2 TK-55, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.