Core 2 Solo SU3300 vs FX-9830P

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

FX-9830P
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
2.10
+1213%
Core 2 Solo SU3300
2008
1 core / 1 thread, 5 Watt
0.16

FX-9830P outperforms Core 2 Solo SU3300 by a whopping 1213% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing FX-9830P and Core 2 Solo SU3300 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking18853296
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD Bristol RidgeIntel Core 2 Solo
Power efficiency5.682.75
Architecture codenameBristol Ridge (2016−2019)Penryn (2008−2011)
Release date31 May 2016 (8 years ago)20 August 2008 (16 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$262

Detailed specifications

FX-9830P and Core 2 Solo SU3300 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)1 (Single-Core)
Threads41
Base clock speed3 GHzno data
Boost clock speed3.7 GHz1.2 GHz
Bus rateno data800 MHz
L1 cache320 KBno data
L2 cache1 MB (per module)3 MB
Chip lithography28 nm45 nm
Die size250 mm2107 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °C100 °C
Number of transistors3,100 million410 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on FX-9830P and Core 2 Solo SU3300 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 configuration1no data
SocketFP4BGA956
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt5.5 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-9830P and Core 2 Solo SU3300. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-9830P and Core 2 Solo SU3300 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-9830P and Core 2 Solo SU3300. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R7 (Bristol Ridge) ( - 900 MHz)no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-9830P and Core 2 Solo SU3300.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes8no 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.

FX-9830P 2.10
+1213%
Core 2 Solo SU3300 0.16

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

FX-9830P 3033
+143%
Core 2 Solo SU3300 1247

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

FX-9830P 9822
+688%
Core 2 Solo SU3300 1247

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.10 0.16
Recency 31 May 2016 20 August 2008
Physical cores 4 1
Threads 4 1
Chip lithography 28 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 5 Watt

FX-9830P has a 1212.5% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 60.7% more advanced lithography process.

Core 2 Solo SU3300, on the other hand, has 600% lower power consumption.

The FX-9830P is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Solo SU3300 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-9830P and Core 2 Solo SU3300, 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.


AMD FX-9830P
FX-9830P
Intel Core 2 Solo SU3300
Core 2 Solo SU3300

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.


3.6 113 votes

Rate FX-9830P on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.3 6 votes

Rate Core 2 Solo SU3300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-9830P or Core 2 Solo SU3300, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.