i3-530 vs Athlon 64 X2 4800+

VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon 64 X2 4800+
2006
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.43
Core i3-530
2010
2 cores / 4 threads, 73 Watt
0.95
+121%

Core i3-530 outperforms Athlon 64 X2 4800+ by a whopping 121% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ and Core i3-530 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking29762520
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.14
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Series2x Athlon 64 (Desktop)no data
Power efficiency0.631.23
Architecture codenameWindsor (2006−2007)Clarkdale (2010−2011)
Release dateno data7 January 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$60

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ and Core i3-530 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads24
Base clock speedno data2.93 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz0.93 GHz
Bus rate1000 MHz2.5 GT/s
L1 cache256K64 KB (per core)
L2 cache512K256 KB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography90 nm32 nm
Die size220 mm281 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data73 °C
Number of transistors233 million382 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data0.65V-1.4V

Compatibility

Information on Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ and Core i3-530 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 configuration11
Socket939FCLGA1156
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt73 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ and Core i3-530. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.2
vProno data-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+
Idle Statesno data+
Demand Based Switchingno data-
PAEno data36 Bit
FDIno data+

Security technologies

Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ and Core i3-530 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ and Core i3-530 are enumerated here.

VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ and Core i3-530. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3
Maximum memory sizeno data16.38 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data21 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataIntel HD Graphics for Previous Generation Intel Processors
Clear Video HDno data+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ and Core i3-530 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data2

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4800+ and Core i3-530.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

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 X2 4800+ 0.43
i3-530 0.95
+121%

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.

Athlon 64 X2 4800+ 679
i3-530 1502
+121%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.43 0.95
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 90 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 73 Watt

Athlon 64 X2 4800+ has 12.3% lower power consumption.

i3-530, on the other hand, has a 120.9% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more threads, and a 181.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Core i3-530 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon 64 X2 4800+ in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 X2 4800+ and Core i3-530, 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 X2 4800+
Athlon 64 X2 4800+
Intel Core i3-530
Core i3-530

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.


3.8 76 votes

Rate Athlon 64 X2 4800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 448 votes

Rate Core i3-530 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon 64 X2 4800+ or Core i3-530, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.