i3-8000 vs Phenom II X4 830
Primary details
Comparing Phenom II X4 830 and Core i3-8000 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2261 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.15 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | no data | Intel Core i3 |
| Power efficiency | 1.30 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Deneb (2009−2011) | Coffee Lake (2017−2019) |
| Release date | 1 September 2009 (15 years ago) | 1 September 2018 (6 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $80 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Phenom II X4 830 and Core i3-8000 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) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 3.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 8 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 36 |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 256 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 258 mm2 | 126 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 72 °C |
| Number of transistors | 758 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom II X4 830 and Core i3-8000 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 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | AM3 | 1151 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X4 830 and Core i3-8000. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom II X4 830 and Core i3-8000 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom II X4 830 and Core i3-8000. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4 Dual-channel |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 64 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 38.397 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Intel UHD Graphics 630 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Phenom II X4 830 and Core i3-8000.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 3.0 |
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 September 2009 | 1 September 2018 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 65 Watt |
i3-8000 has an age advantage of 9 years, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 46.2% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Phenom II X4 830 and Core i3-8000. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X4 830 and Core i3-8000, 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.
