AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-62 vs Intel Pentium III 1333
Comparative analysis of AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-62 and Intel Pentium III 1333 processors for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Performance, Compatibility, Advanced Technologies, Virtualization.
Benchmark processor performance analysis: PassMark — Single thread mark, PassMark — CPU mark, Geekbench 4 — Single Core, Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core.
AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-62
Buy on Amazon
vs
Intel Pentium III 1333
Buy on Amazon
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-62
- CPU is newer: launch date 5 year(s) 4 month(s) later
- 1 more cores, run more applications at once: 2 vs 1
- Around 58% higher clock speed: 2.1 GHz vs 1.33 GHz
- A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor: 65 nm vs 130 nm
- 4x more L2 cache, more data can be stored in the L2 cache for quick access later
| Launch date | 13 April 2007 vs December 2001 |
| Number of cores | 2 vs 1 |
| Maximum frequency | 2. |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm vs 130 nm |
| L2 cache | 1024 KB vs 256 KB |
Reasons to consider the Intel Pentium III 1333
- Around 17% lower typical power consumption: 29.9 Watt vs 35 Watt
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 29.9 Watt vs 35 Watt |
Compare benchmarks
CPU 1: AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-62
CPU 2: Intel Pentium III 1333
| Name | AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-62 | Intel Pentium III 1333 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark — Single thread mark | 775 | |
| PassMark — CPU mark | 756 | |
| Geekbench 4 — Single Core | 1024 | |
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core | 1658 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-62 | Intel Pentium III 1333 | |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture codename | Tyler | Tualatin |
| Launch date | 13 April 2007 | December 2001 |
| Place in performance rating | 1835 | not rated |
| Series | 2x AMD Turion 64 | Legacy Intel® Pentium® Processor |
| Vertical segment | Laptop | Desktop |
| Status | Discontinued | |
| 64 bit support | ||
| Front-side bus (FSB) | 800 MHz | |
| L2 cache | 1024 KB | 256 KB |
| Manufacturing process technology | 65 nm | 130 nm |
| Maximum frequency | 2. 1 GHz |
1.33 GHz |
| Number of cores | 2 | 1 |
| Number of threads | 2 | |
| Base frequency | 1.33 GHz | |
| Bus Speed | 133 MHz FSB | |
| Die size | 80 mm2 | |
| L1 cache | 8 KB | |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 69 °C | |
| Maximum core temperature | 69°C | |
| Transistor count | 44 million | |
| VID voltage range | 1. 5V |
|
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 35 Watt | 29.9 Watt |
| Low Halogen Options Available | ||
| Max number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | |
| Sockets supported | PPGA370 | |
| Intel® Turbo Boost technology | ||
| Intel® Virtualization Technology (VT-x) |
Navigation
Choose a CPU
Compare processors
Compare AMD Turion 64 X2 TL-62 with others
AMD
Turion 64 X2 TL-62
vs
AMD
Turion 64 X2 TL-64
AMD
Turion 64 X2 TL-62
vs
Intel
Celeron Dual-Core T1400
AMD
Turion 64 X2 TL-62
vs
Intel
Core i7-3555LE
AMD
Turion 64 X2 TL-62
vs
Intel
Atom E3827
AMD
Turion 64 X2 TL-62
vs
AMD
A10-7300
AMD
Turion 64 X2 TL-62
vs
AMD
PRO A12-8830B
Intel Pentium Dual Core or AMD Turion 64 X2
TL93
Posts: 52 +0
-
-
#1
Intel Pentium Dual Core or AMD Turion 64 X2
As you can tell, i’m asking about which mobile processor is better.
I know that Core 2 Duo is better than both of them FTW but we don’t wanna pay that much for a laptop.
So which one would be better all round?
Its not gonna be much of a gaming computer, more multimedia though like videos and other things.
So please, HELP us!
Thanks,
Tim
-
-
#2
core duo CPUs are WITHOUT x64 architecture. so you can’t install WIndows x64 OS. core2duo has x64 instructions. remember this when you want to install 4gb of ram and want to use it fully. in gaming machines the main thing is videocard(recommended nvidia geforce go 8600gt).
TL93
Posts: 52 +0
-
-
#3
Anyways, we went with AMD Turion 64 x2 instead.
Now to deal with my Wireless Router issue =(
Thanks,
Tim
Julio Franco
Posts: 8,937 +1,857
-
-
#4
Hey Tim,
I really have no idea where lamo was going with his comments, but anyway…
You are right about the Core 2 Duo being faster, but if you want to spend less, those are your two choices and the Turion X2 that you finally bought is just about as fast as the Pentium dual core. Benchmarks out there will show little differences here and there depending on the application but in real life usage, you won’t notice a thing.
Even when taking power consumption into consideration, those come really close, so either way you wouldn’t have gone wrong.
-
-
#5
Julio, i meant, that coreduo cpu doesn’t support x64 instructions and core2duo has this feature
Julio Franco
Posts: 8,937 +1,857
-
-
#6
That is indeed correct.
The Pentium Dual Core TL93 referred to however is not Core Duo, and depending on the model it may support x64.
TL93
Posts: 52 +0
-
-
#7
Julio — I’m just confused about the whole Core Duo thing and the Pentium Dual Core thing!
Some even have matching numbers and processor codenames like yoham.
Rage_3K_Moiz
Posts: 5,403 +43
-
-
#8
Intel’s mobile processors list is way messier compared to the desktop CPU one.
Just look at the codenames! Yonah, Merom, Merom-2M, Penryn, Penryn-3M…
Compare Intel Pentium 4 3.0 vs AMD Turion 64 MK-36
| Intel Pentium 4 3.0 | AMD Turion 64 MK-36 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Two Processors Models came out at the same time | COMPOSE 1stead | ||
| The nucleus architecture of the Pentium 4 3.0 processor is called Northwood | The nucleus architecture of the Turion 64 MK-36 processor is called Richmond | Pentium 4 3.0 this is a table processor | |
| Intel Pentium 4 3.0 runs on Socket 478 | AMD Turion 64 MK-36 runs on Socket S1 | ||
FSB data Intel Pentium 4 3. 0 — 800 MHz FSB |
FSB data AMD Turion 64 MK-36 — 800 MHz 16-bit HT (1.6 GT/s) | ||
| 2 vs. 1 | Turion 64 MK-36 is very far behind in thread count, 1 vs. 2 | ||
| Pentium 4 3.0 wins significantly in base clock speed, 3000 MHz compared to 2000 MHz | Turion 64 MK-36 is significantly inferior in terms of base clock frequency, 2000 MHz compared to 3000 MHz Turion 64 MK-36 is significantly superior in terms of manufacturability, its manufacturing process is 90 nm, compared with 130 nm in the rival Pentium 4 3.00017 | The Turion 64 MK-36 has a much higher number of transistors, 81 million vs. 55 million | |
| The Pentium 4 3.0 needs more powerful cooling since its thermal dissipation is 81.9 watts | -36 significantly outperforms in terms of heat dissipation, its TDP is slightly lower than that of the competitor and reaches 31 W Not much inferior to the Turion 64 MK-36 processor | Turion 64 MK-36 has a much higher core temperature limit of 95°C. And this is undoubtedly a serious argument.
| The first level cache of the Turion 64 MK-36 CPU is significantly larger than that of the Pentium 4 3.0 and is equal to 128 Kilobytes |
Comparison of instructions and technologies
| Technology or instruction name | Intel Pentium 4 3.0 | AMD Turion 64 MK-36 | Short description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Stop Grant state | — | Energy saving status. | |
| Sleep state | — | Sleep state. nine0017 | |
| Autohalt state | — | Auto stop status. | |
| PowerNow! | — | PowerNow! idle frequency reduction technology. |
| Technology or instruction name | Intel Pentium 4 3.0 | AMD Turion 64 MK-36 | |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMX (Multimedia Extensions) | Multimedia extensions. | ||
| SSE (Streaming SIMD Extensions) | Processor streaming SIMD extension. | ||
| SSE2 (Streaming SIMD Extensions 2) | Processor Streaming SIMD Extension 2. | ||
| SSE3 (Streaming SIMD Extensions 3) | — | Streaming SIMD Processor Extension 3. | |
| AMD64 | — | 64-bit microprocessor architecture developed by AMD. |
|
| 3DNow! | — | Optional MMX extension for AMD processors. |
| Technology or instruction name | Intel Pentium 4 3.0 | AMD Turion 64 MK-36 | Short description |
|---|---|---|---|
| EVP (Enhanced Virus Protection) | — | Improved virus protection. |
| Technology or instruction name | Intel Pentium 4 3.0 | AMD Turion 64 MK-36 | Short description |
|---|---|---|---|
| AMD-V | — | AMD-V Virtualization Technology. |
| Technology or instruction name | Intel Pentium 4 3. 0 |
AMD Turion 64 MK-36 | Short description |
|---|---|---|---|
| Hyper-Threading | — | Hyperthreading technology. nine0017 | |
| SMM (System Management mode) | — | System control mode. |
Benchmarks
Overall performance rating
The rating can be calculated by the formula, taking into account all indicators: test results in benchmarks, temperature, socket, release year, architecture, number of cores and threads, clock speed, instructions, auto-acceleration technologies, and other indicators. The results of the overall rating showed that the Turion 64 MK-36 surpasses its rival Pentium 4 3.0 in most parameters. The Pentium 4 3.0 model barely scores 256.64 points compared to its competitor. nine0159
PassMark CPU Mark
Almost all processors presented on our site have been tested in PassMark.
Perhaps the most popular benchmark in Runet. The benchmark has a wide pool of tools for evaluating computer data, in particular the CPU. Diagnostics include compression, extended instruction checking, encryption, floating point calculations, integer calculations, game physics calculations, single-threaded and multi-threaded tests. In this case, it is possible to compare the results with other configurations in the database. The Performance Test showed a clear advantage for the Turion 64 MK-36 processor (334 points) over the Pentium 4 3.0 (164 points). The Pentium 4 3.0 with a score of 164 clearly loses in this test. nine0159
Cinebench 10 (32 bit) Single-threaded test
It is possible to test multi-processor systems. The Single version in its work uses only one thread for rendering and one core. This benchmark for testing video cards and processors is now very outdated. Works in operating systems Mac OS X, Windows. Released by MAXON, it was based on the Cinema 4D 3D editor.
It uses a method of geometric optics — ray tracing. The basic mode for passing performance tests is a photorealistic rendering of a 3D scene, spatial light sources, multilevel reflections, working with light, simulating global illumination, and procedural shaders. nine0159
Cinebench 10 (32 bit) Multi-threaded test
Multi-Core version is another way to test in Cinebench R10 benchmark, which already uses multi-threaded and multi-core testing mode. It is important to consider that the number of threads in this version of the program is limited to sixteen.
Cinebench 11.5 (64-bit) Multi-threaded test
Multi-threaded version of the CINEBENCH 11.5 benchmark — which can load the processor to the full, using all cores and threads. Unlike older versions, 64 threads are supported here. Testing Pentium 4 3.0 in the Cinebench 11.5 benchmark showed a result of 0.53 points, slightly outperforming its competitor. At this time, Turion 64 MK-36 gets its 0.44 points, which fully justifies their close positions in the ranking.
nine0159
Cinebench 11.5 (64-bit) Single-threaded test
Excellent multifunctional Cinebench version R11.5 from Maxon. In this Single-Core variant, tests occur using one core and one thread. His tests are still relevant. In testing, as before, the ray tracing process is used, a highly detailed three-dimensional space is rendered with a large number of glass and crystal and translucent spheres. The result of the test is the «frames per second» value. Testing in single-threaded mode of the Pentium 4 3.0 processor in Cinebench 11.5 Single-Core showed that with a score of 0.52 points, it is not far ahead of the competitor. But the Turion 64 MK-36 itself scored 0.44 points in this test. nine0159
Cinebench 15 (64-bit) Multi-thread test
Multi-Thread Cinebench R15 will load your assembly to the full, showing everything that it is capable of. All threads and CPU cores are used in the process of rendering complex 3D models. The program is ideal for modern multithreaded processors from AMD and Intel.
it is capable of using 256 computational threads. The Pentium 4 3.0, with a score of 45.94, doesn’t outperform much in the multi-threaded Cinebench r15 benchmark. Slightly behind him is the Turion 64 MK-36, gaining 39.44 points.
Cinebench 15 (64-bit) Single-threaded test
Cinebench R15 is the most up-to-date benchmark from the Finns from Maxon. A complex 3D scene is rendered with a large number of light sources, detailed objects and reflections. It tests the entire system: both video cards and processors. For processors, the result of the calculation is the number of PTS points, and for video cards, the number of frames per second. FPS. In this version of the Single Core program, only one thread is used for rendering. The single-threaded test of the Pentium 4 3.0 processor in the Cinebench R15 program showed a result of 46.03 points, slightly ahead of the competitor. Having received 39With .59 points, the Turion 64 MK-36 doesn’t fall far behind in this test.
Geekbench 4.
0 (64-bit) Multi-threaded benchmark
Geekbench 4 64-bit multi-threaded benchmark. Supporting a variety of operating systems and devices makes Geekbench benchmarks the most valuable to date. It’s already Geekbench 4 64-bit multi-core processor Pentium 4 3.0 received 1031.33 points, which is slightly higher than the Turion 64 MK-36. In this test, the Turion 64 MK-36 scores 951 points.
Geekbench 4.0 (64-bit) Single-threaded test
The latest single-threaded version of Geekbench 4 for testing desktops and laptops. For the first time, both iOS and Android smartphones and tablets are supported in this version of the program. The program, like its earlier versions, can be run on operating systems running Windows, Mac OS, Linux. The Single-Core test uses 1 processor thread. The Pentium 4 3.0 scored higher in Geekbench 4’s single-threaded test, with a score of 1034.2, but not far ahead of the competition. But the Turion 64 MK-36 itself also showed a good score of 1006 points, slightly losing its place to the Pentium 4 3.
0 model. nine0159
Geekbench 3 (32 bit) Multi-core test
Geekbench 3 multi-core benchmark — can allow you to stress your processor and show how stable your system is.
Geekbench 3 (32 bit) Single-threaded test
The Geekbench cross-platform tester is often used to evaluate the system under Mac, but it can work on both Windows and Linux. The basic purpose is to check the efficiency of processors. The Single Core version of the benchmark uses only one thread and one processor core. nine0159
Geekbench 2
There are almost 200 processor models on our website that have results from this benchmark. At the moment there are more recent versions, 4v and 5v. An outdated version of the Geekbench 2 benchmark.
X264 HD 4.0 Pass 1
In fact, this is a test in practice of system performance by transcoding HD files to the new H.264 format, the so-called MPEG 4 x264 codec. This test is faster compared to Pass 2, as encoding is performed at the same speed.
An ideal test for multi-core and multi-thread processors. The frame rate processed per second is the result of the test. The MPEG 4 video processing speed of the Pentium 4 3.0 model is much higher and amounts to 13.16 FPS. But the Turion 64 MK-36 did a poor job, its speed was 10.48 FPS. nine0159
X264 HD 4.0 Pass 2
This is a slightly different, slower test based on video file compression. The end result is also determined by frames per second. You need to understand that a very real task is being carried out, and the x264 codec is used in a large number of video programs. As a result, we get a higher quality video file. The same MPEG4 x264 codec is used, but the processing is already happening at a variable rate. Therefore, the test results really reflect the performance of the system. During the encoding of the video file by the Pentium 4 3.0 processor into the mpeg4 format, a processing speed of 2.78 Frames / s was obtained. While the Turion 64 MK-36 trailed slightly behind with 2.
41 fps. nine0159
3DMark06 CPU
Written using the DirectX 9.0 library by Futuremark. Processors are tested in 2 ways: the game AI does a pathfinding, and another test simulates the system using PhysX. This test is often used by overclockers and gamers and those who like to overclock processors. Benchmark for checking the central processor, and video system. The Pentium 4 3.0 performs significantly faster in the pathfinding and game physics tests, scoring 811 points. The Turion 64 MK-36 processor coped worse with this task, receiving 582.9points.
3DMark Fire Strike Physics
Approximately two hundred processors on our Internet resource have data in the 3DMark Fire Strike Physics test. It represents an arithmetic test that makes calculations in game physics.
WinRAR 4.0
A familiar archiver. The compression speed of the RAR algorithm was estimated, for this large amounts of randomly generated data were used. The resulting speed in the process of processing «Kb / s» — this is the result of testing.