Celeron 6305 vs Phenom II X3 N830

Aggregate performance score

Phenom II X3 N830
2010
3 cores / 3 threads, 35 Watt
0.72
Celeron 6305
2020
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
1.36
+88.9%

Celeron 6305 outperforms Phenom II X3 N830 by an impressive 89% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Phenom II X3 N830 and Celeron 6305 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking26992254
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Series3x AMD Phenom IIIntel Tiger Lake
Power efficiency1.888.27
Architecture codenameChamplain (2010−2011)Tiger Lake-U (2020)
Release date12 May 2010 (14 years ago)1 September 2020 (4 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Phenom II X3 N830 and Celeron 6305 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 cores3 (Tri-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads32
Boost clock speed2.1 GHz1.8 GHz
Bus rate3600 MHz4 GT/s
L1 cacheno data160 KB
L2 cache1.5 MB2.5 MB
L3 cacheno data4 MB
Chip lithography45 nm10 nm SuperFin
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Phenom II X3 N830 and Celeron 6305 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 configurationno data1
SocketS1FCBGA1449
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X3 N830 and Celeron 6305. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions86x MMX(+), 3DNow!(+), SSE(1,2,3,4A),-64, AMD-VIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Deep Learning Boost-+

Security technologies

Phenom II X3 N830 and Celeron 6305 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
SGXno data-
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom II X3 N830 and Celeron 6305 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom II X3 N830 and Celeron 6305. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data64 GB
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel® UHD Graphics for 11th Gen Intel® Processors
Quick Sync Video-+
Clear Video HDno data+
Graphics max frequencyno data1.25 GHz
Execution Unitsno data48

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Phenom II X3 N830 and Celeron 6305 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data4

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Phenom II X3 N830 and Celeron 6305 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096x2304@60Hz
Max resolution over eDPno data4096x2304@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data7680x4320@60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Phenom II X3 N830 and Celeron 6305 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12.1
OpenGLno data4.6

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.

Phenom II X3 N830 0.72
Celeron 6305 1.36
+88.9%

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.

Phenom II X3 N830 1107
Celeron 6305 2080
+87.9%

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.

Phenom II X3 N830 269
Celeron 6305 750
+179%

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.

Phenom II X3 N830 744
Celeron 6305 1264
+69.9%

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.

Phenom II X3 N830 1817
Celeron 6305 3465
+90.7%

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.

Phenom II X3 N830 4954
Celeron 6305 6611
+33.4%

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.

Phenom II X3 N830 24.7
+58.4%
Celeron 6305 39.12

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Phenom II X3 N830 2
Celeron 6305 2
+8.4%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.72 1.36
Recency 12 May 2010 1 September 2020
Physical cores 3 2
Threads 3 2
Chip lithography 45 nm 10 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 15 Watt

Phenom II X3 N830 has 50% more physical cores and 50% more threads.

Celeron 6305, on the other hand, has a 88.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 350% more advanced lithography process, and 133.3% lower power consumption.

The Celeron 6305 is our recommended choice as it beats the Phenom II X3 N830 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X3 N830 and Celeron 6305, 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.


AMD Phenom II X3 N830
Phenom II X3 N830
Intel Celeron 6305
Celeron 6305

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.


4.1 37 votes

Rate Phenom II X3 N830 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 147 votes

Rate Celeron 6305 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Phenom II X3 N830 or Celeron 6305, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.