0 Comments
| AMD Turion 64 technology ML-42 vs Athlon 3700+ |
First seen on January, 2013
AMD Turion 64 technology ML-42
- 2.4 GHz
- Single core
Reasons to buy the AMD Turion 64 technology ML-42
![]() | Much newer manufacturing process 90 nm | ![]() | Much lower typical power consumption 28.44W |
![]() | Significantly higher Maximum operating temperature 95 °C | ![]() | Better PassMark (Single core) score 700 |
VS
Released June, 2004
AMD Athlon 3700+
- 2.4 GHz
- Single core
Reasons to buy the Athlon 3700+
![]() | More l2 cache 1 MB | ![]() | Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
AMD Turion 64 technology ML-42CPUBoss Winner | ![]() | |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
Much newer manufacturing process | 90 nm | vs | 130 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Much lower typical power consumption | 28.44W | vs | 72.31W | 2.5x lower typical power consumption | |||
Significantly higher Maximum operating temperature | 95 °C | vs | 70 °C | More than 35% higher Maximum operating temperature | |||
Better PassMark (Single core) score | 700 | vs | 498 | More than 40% better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
Much lower annual home energy cost | 8.43 $/year | vs | 21.44 $/year | 2.5x lower annual home energy cost | |||
Much lower annual commercial energy cost | 30.66 $/year | vs | 77.96 $/year | 2.5x lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
Better performance per watt | 1.48 pt/W | vs | 0.49 pt/W | More than 3x better performance per watt | |||
| |||||||
More l2 cache | 1 MB | vs | 0.5 MB | 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
Much more l2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | vs | 0.5 MB/core | 2x more l2 cache per core |
Benchmarks Real world tests of Turion 64 technology ML-42 vs Athlon 3700+
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Turion 64 technology ML-42 | vs | Athlon 3700+ |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 2.4 GHz | |
Cores | Single core | Single core | |
Socket type | |||
754 | |||
939 | |||
features | |||
Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
Instruction set extensions | |||
SSE2 | |||
MMX | |||
SSE3 | |||
SSE | |||
3DNow! |
details | Turion 64 technology ML-42 | vs | Athlon 3700+ |
---|---|---|---|
Threads | 1 | 1 | |
L2 cache | 0.5 MB | 1 MB | |
L2 cache per core | 0.5 MB/core | 1 MB/core | |
Manufacture process | 90 nm | 130 nm | |
Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
Operating temperature | Unknown - 95°C | Unknown - 70°C | |
overclocking | |||
Overclocked clock speed | 2.81 GHz | 2.87 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 2.4 GHz | 2.4 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.81 GHz | 2.87 GHz | |
power consumption | |||
TDP | 35W | 89W | |
Annual home energy cost | 8.43 $/year | 21.44 $/year | |
Annual commercial energy cost | 30.66 $/year | 77.96 $/year | |
Performance per watt | 1.48 pt/W | 0.49 pt/W | |
Typical power consumption | 28.44W | 72.31W |
AMD Turion 64 technology ML-42 ![]() | AMD Athlon 3700+ ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
3000+ vs 3700+ | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$305 | ||
2600 vs 3700+ | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
Ryzen™ 7 1700X vs 3700+ | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$240 | ||
3770 vs 3700+ | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
3200+ vs 3700+ | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
3400+ vs 3700+ | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
ML-44 vs ML-42 | ||
Popular Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$300 | $305 | |
2500 vs W3520 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | $272 | |
6700K vs 4790K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
6410 vs 4200U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
7th Gen A9-9410 vs 6200U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$161 | $275 | |
N3540 vs 4005U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$225 | $134 | |
3217U vs 847 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$180 | ||
5200 vs 3470 | ||