Ultra 9 288V vs Athlon 64 TF-20

VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon 64 TF-20
2009
1 core / 1 thread, 25 Watt
0.16
Core Ultra 9 288V
2024
8 cores / 8 threads, 30 Watt
12.44
+7675%

Core Ultra 9 288V outperforms Athlon 64 TF-20 by a whopping 7675% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon 64 TF-20 and Core Ultra 9 288V processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3296624
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Athlon 64no data
Power efficiency0.6039.04
Architecture codenameSherman (2009)Lunar Lake (2024)
Release date1 May 2009 (15 years ago)24 September 2024 (less than a year ago)

Detailed specifications

Athlon 64 TF-20 and Core Ultra 9 288V 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)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads18
Base clock speedno data3.3 GHz
Boost clock speed1.6 GHz5.1 GHz
Bus rate667 MHz37 MHz
L1 cache0.1 MB192 KB (per core)
L2 cache512 KB2.5 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data12 MB (shared)
Chip lithography65 nm3 nm
Maximum core temperature95 °C100 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data

Compatibility

Information on Athlon 64 TF-20 and Core Ultra 9 288V 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
SocketS1g1Intel BGA 2833
Power consumption (TDP)25 Watt30 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 TF-20 and Core Ultra 9 288V. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX, 3DNow!, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, AMD64, Enhanced Virus Protectionno data
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
VirusProtect+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
TSX-+

Security technologies

Athlon 64 TF-20 and Core Ultra 9 288V technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 64 TF-20 and Core Ultra 9 288V are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 TF-20 and Core Ultra 9 288V. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR5

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataArc 140V

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon 64 TF-20 and Core Ultra 9 288V.

PCIe versionno data5.0
PCI Express lanesno data4

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.

Athlon 64 TF-20 0.16
Ultra 9 288V 12.44
+7675%

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.

Athlon 64 TF-20 1245
Ultra 9 288V 10697
+759%

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.

Athlon 64 TF-20 612
Ultra 9 288V 12505
+1943%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.16 12.44
Recency 1 May 2009 24 September 2024
Physical cores 1 8
Threads 1 8
Chip lithography 65 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 25 Watt 30 Watt

Athlon 64 TF-20 has 20% lower power consumption.

Ultra 9 288V, on the other hand, has a 7675% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 15 years, 700% more physical cores and 700% more threads, and a 2066.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Core Ultra 9 288V is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon 64 TF-20 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 TF-20 and Core Ultra 9 288V, 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 Athlon 64 TF-20
Athlon 64 TF-20
Intel Core Ultra 9 288V
Core Ultra 9 288V

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.


3.1 34 votes

Rate Athlon 64 TF-20 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3 33 votes

Rate Core Ultra 9 288V on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon 64 TF-20 or Core Ultra 9 288V, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.