C-30 vs Athlon X2 L310
Primary details
Comparing Athlon X2 L310 and C-30 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | 2x AMD Athlon | AMD C-Series |
| Architecture codename | Conesus (2009) | Ontario (2010−2012) |
| Release date | 10 September 2009 (14 years ago) | 9 November 2010 (13 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Athlon X2 L310 and C-30 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 | 1.2 GHz | 1.2 GHz |
| Bus rate | 800 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 256 KB | 64 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 40 nm |
| Die size | no data | 75 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 95 °C | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon X2 L310 and C-30 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 | BGA / 638 lidless micro-PGA | FT1 BGA 413-Ball |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 13 Watt | 9 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon X2 L310 and C-30. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, 3DNow, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, AMD64, Virtualization, Enhanced Virus Protection | 40 nm, 1.24-1.35V |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon X2 L310 and C-30 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon X2 L310 and C-30. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3 Single-channel |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon HD 6250 |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 10 September 2009 | 9 November 2010 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 13 Watt | 9 Watt |
Athlon X2 L310 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
C-30, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, a 62.5% more advanced lithography process, and 44.4% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Athlon X2 L310 and C-30. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon X2 L310 and C-30, 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.
