Pentium G2030 vs Athlon II X4 630
Aggregate performance score
Athlon II X4 630 outperforms Pentium G2030 by a significant 24% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Athlon II X4 630 and Pentium G2030 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2233 | 2398 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 6.02 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | 1.35 | 1.89 |
| Architecture codename | Propus (2009−2011) | no data |
| Release date | 16 September 2009 (15 years ago) | 1 April 2013 (11 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $63 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Athlon II X4 630 and Pentium G2030 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 3 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.8 GHz | no data |
| Bus rate | no data | 5 GT/s |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | no data |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | no data |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 3 MB Intel® Smart Cache |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | 169 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | 300 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon II X4 630 and Pentium G2030 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 | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | AM3 | FCLGA1155 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 55 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon II X4 630 and Pentium G2030. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2 |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| My WiFi | no data | - |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
Security technologies
Athlon II X4 630 and Pentium G2030 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | - |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon II X4 630 and Pentium G2030 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | - |
| VT-x | no data | + |
| EPT | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon II X4 630 and Pentium G2030. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3-1333, DDR3-1600 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 32 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 21 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | + |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | Intel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® Processors |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 1.05 GHz |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Athlon II X4 630 and Pentium G2030 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 3 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon II X4 630 and Pentium G2030.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 2.0 |
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.
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.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.36 | 1.10 |
| Recency | 16 September 2009 | 1 April 2013 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 4 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 55 Watt |
Athlon II X4 630 has a 23.6% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
Pentium G2030, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 104.5% more advanced lithography process, and 72.7% lower power consumption.
The Athlon II X4 630 is our recommended choice as it beats the Pentium G2030 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon II X4 630 and Pentium G2030, 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.
