Athlon XP 1700+ vs Turion II P520
Aggregate performance score
Turion II P520 outperforms Athlon XP 1700+ by a whopping 390% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3124 | 3640 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD Turion II | no data |
| Power efficiency | 0.83 | 0.07 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Architecture codename | Champlain (2010−2011) | Thoroughbred (2001−2002) |
| Release date | 12 May 2010 (15 years ago) | October 2001 (24 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Turion II P520 and Athlon XP 1700+ 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Boost clock speed | 2.3 GHz | 1.47 GHz |
| Bus rate | 3600 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 256 KB |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 180 nm |
| Die size | no data | 150 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 37 million |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Turion II P520 and Athlon XP 1700+ 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 | no data | 1 |
| Socket | S1 (S1g4) | A |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 64 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Turion II P520 and Athlon XP 1700+. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, 3DNow, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4A, AMD64, Enhanced Virus Protection, Virtualization, HyperTransport 3.0 | no data |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Turion II P520 and Athlon XP 1700+ are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Turion II P520 and Athlon XP 1700+. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | no data |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.49 | 0.10 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 180 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 64 Watt |
Turion II P520 has a 390% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 300% more advanced lithography process, and 156% lower power consumption.
The AMD Turion II P520 is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD Athlon XP 1700+ in performance tests.
Be aware that Turion II P520 is a notebook processor while Athlon XP 1700+ is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
