A6-3430MX vs Athlon 64 X2 TK-42
Primary details
Comparing Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 and A6-3430MX processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | 2483 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | 2x AMD Athlon 64 | AMD A-Series |
| Architecture codename | Tyler (2007−2009) | Llano (2011−2012) |
| Release date | 1 November 2009 (14 years ago) | 8 December 2011 (12 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 and A6-3430MX 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) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.7 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 2.4 GHz |
| Bus rate | 1600 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 0 MB | 512 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 4 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | no data | 218 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 95 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 1000 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 and A6-3430MX 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 | Socket S1 | FS1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 20 Watt | 45 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 and A6-3430MX. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 86x Enhanced Virus Protection (EVP), MMX, PowerNow, SSE3,-64, Enhanced 3DNow | 3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6480G |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 and A6-3430MX are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 and A6-3430MX. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon HD 6520G |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 November 2009 | 8 December 2011 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 20 Watt | 45 Watt |
Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 has 125% lower power consumption.
A6-3430MX, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 103.1% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 and A6-3430MX. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 and A6-3430MX, 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.
