Atom x5-Z8330 vs Turion 64 ML-30
Aggregate performance score
Atom x5-Z8330 outperforms Turion 64 ML-30 by a whopping 219% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Turion 64 ML-30 and Atom x5-Z8330 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3289 | 2883 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Turion 64 | 5x Intel Atom |
| Power efficiency | 0.43 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Lancaster (2005−2006) | Airmont (2016) |
| Release date | March 2005 (19 years ago) | 8 February 2016 (8 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Turion 64 ML-30 and Atom x5-Z8330 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.44 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 1.92 GHz |
| Bus rate | 800 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 2 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 14 nm |
| Die size | 125 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 90 °C |
| Number of transistors | 114 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Turion 64 ML-30 and Atom x5-Z8330 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 | 754 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | no data |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Turion 64 ML-30 and Atom x5-Z8330. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | - | + |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Security technologies
Turion 64 ML-30 and Atom x5-Z8330 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| Identity Protection | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Turion 64 ML-30 and Atom x5-Z8330. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3L-RS 1600 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 2 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 1 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 12.8 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 500 MHz |
| Execution Units | no data | 12 |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Turion 64 ML-30 and Atom x5-Z8330 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 2 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Turion 64 ML-30 and Atom x5-Z8330.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 1 |
| USB revision | no data | 3.0 |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.16 | 0.51 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 4 |
| Threads | 1 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 14 nm |
Atom x5-Z8330 has a 218.8% higher aggregate performance score, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 542.9% more advanced lithography process.
The Atom x5-Z8330 is our recommended choice as it beats the Turion 64 ML-30 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Turion 64 ML-30 and Atom x5-Z8330, 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.
