Athlon II X3 415e vs i3-530

Aggregate performance score

Core i3-530
2010
2 cores / 4 threads, 73 Watt
0.96
+4.3%
Athlon II X3 415e
2010
3 cores / 3 threads, 45 Watt
0.92

Core i3-530 outperforms Athlon II X3 415e by a minimal 4% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i3-530 and Athlon II X3 415e processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25042525
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.140.97
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.221.90
Architecture codenameClarkdale (2010−2011)Rana (2009−2011)
Release date7 January 2010 (14 years ago)11 May 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$60$75

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Athlon II X3 415e has 593% better value for money than i3-530.

Detailed specifications

Core i3-530 and Athlon II X3 415e 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)3 (Tri-Core)
Threads43
Base clock speed2.93 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed0.93 GHz2.5 GHz
Bus rate2.5 GT/sno data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)128 KB (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)512 KB (per core)
L3 cache4 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm45 nm
Die size81 mm2169 mm2
Maximum core temperature73 °Cno data
Number of transistors382 million300 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Core i3-530 and Athlon II X3 415e 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
SocketFCLGA1156AM3
Power consumption (TDP)73 Watt45 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i3-530 and Athlon II X3 415e. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.2no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology+no data
Idle States+no data
Demand Based Switching-no data
PAE36 Bitno data
FDI+no data

Security technologies

Core i3-530 and Athlon II X3 415e technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i3-530 and Athlon II X3 415e are enumerated here.

VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i3-530 and Athlon II X3 415e. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size16.38 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth21 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for Previous Generation Intel® Processorsno data
Clear Video HD+no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i3-530 and Athlon II X3 415e integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i3-530 and Athlon II X3 415e.

PCIe version2.02.0
PCI Express lanes16no 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.

i3-530 0.96
+4.3%
Athlon II X3 415e 0.92

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.

i3-530 1501
+4.2%
Athlon II X3 415e 1441

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.96 0.92
Recency 7 January 2010 11 May 2010
Physical cores 2 3
Threads 4 3
Chip lithography 32 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 73 Watt 45 Watt

i3-530 has a 4.3% higher aggregate performance score, 33.3% more threads, and a 40.6% more advanced lithography process.

Athlon II X3 415e, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 months, 50% more physical cores, and 62.2% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Core i3-530 and Athlon II X3 415e.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i3-530 and Athlon II X3 415e, 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.


Intel Core i3-530
Core i3-530
AMD Athlon II X3 415e
Athlon II X3 415e

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.


2.8 438 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.4 18 votes

Rate Athlon II X3 415e on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i3-530 or Athlon II X3 415e, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.