Athlon 64 X2 TK-57 vs Phenom II X3 N830
Primary details
Comparing Phenom II X3 N830 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-57 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2704 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | 3x AMD Phenom II | 2x Athlon 64 |
| Power efficiency | 1.89 | no data |
| Architecture codename | Champlain (2010−2011) | Hawk-256 |
| Release date | 12 May 2010 (14 years ago) | no data (2024 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Phenom II X3 N830 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-57 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 | 3 (Tri-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 3 | 2 |
| Boost clock speed | 2.1 GHz | 1.9 GHz |
| Bus rate | 3600 MHz | 667 MHz |
| L2 cache | 1.5 MB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 65 nm |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom II X3 N830 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-57 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 | S1 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 31 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X3 N830 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-57. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 86x MMX(+), 3DNow!(+), SSE(1,2,3,4A),-64, AMD-V | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom II X3 N830 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-57 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom II X3 N830 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-57. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | 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.
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
| Physical cores | 3 | 2 |
| Threads | 3 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 35 Watt | 31 Watt |
Phenom II X3 N830 has 50% more physical cores and 50% more threads, and a 44.4% more advanced lithography process.
Athlon 64 X2 TK-57, on the other hand, has 12.9% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Phenom II X3 N830 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-57. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X3 N830 and Athlon 64 X2 TK-57, 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.
