Pentium 4-M P4-M 1,7 vs Athlon II P320
Aggregate performance score
Athlon II P320 outperforms Pentium 4-M P4-M 1,7 by a whopping 175% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Athlon II P320 and Pentium 4-M P4-M 1,7 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2959 | 3294 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Athlon II | Pentium 4-M |
| Power efficiency | 1.66 | 0.50 |
| Architecture codename | Champlain (2010−2011) | Northwood (2002−2004) |
| Release date | 12 May 2010 (14 years ago) | no data |
Detailed specifications
Athlon II P320 and Pentium 4-M P4-M 1,7 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 | 2.1 GHz | 1.7 GHz |
| Bus rate | 3200 MHz | 400 MHz |
| L1 cache | 256 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 130 nm |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon II P320 and Pentium 4-M P4-M 1,7 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.
| Socket | S1g4 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 30 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon II P320 and Pentium 4-M P4-M 1,7. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | SSE-3, SSE4A, 3DNow!, MMX, DEP, SVM | no data |
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.
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.
wPrime 32
wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.44 | 0.16 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 130 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 30 Watt |
Athlon II P320 has a 175% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 188.9% more advanced lithography process, and 20% lower power consumption.
The Athlon II P320 is our recommended choice as it beats the Pentium 4-M P4-M 1,7 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon II P320 and Pentium 4-M P4-M 1,7, 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.
