0 Comments
| Intel Core i3 3220 vs AMD Athlon II 160u |
Released September, 2012
Intel Core i3 3220
- 3.3 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Intel Core i3 3220
![]() | Much higher clock speed 3.3 GHz | ![]() | More threads 4 |
![]() | Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm | ![]() | Much better PassMark score 4,229 |
VS
First seen on June, 2012
AMD Athlon II 160u
- 1.8 GHz
- Single core
Reasons to buy the AMD Athlon II 160u
![]() | Much more l2 cache 1 MB | ![]() | Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core |
![]() | Much higher Maximum operating temperature 80 °C | ![]() | Much lower typical power consumption 16.25W |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
Much higher clock speed | 3.3 GHz | vs | 1.8 GHz | Around 85% higher clock speed | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
More threads | 4 | vs | 1 | 3 more threads | |||
Much newer manufacturing process | 22 nm | vs | 45 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
Much better PassMark score | 4,229 | vs | 556 | More than 7.5x better PassMark score | |||
Much better PassMark (Single core) score | 1,764 | vs | 557 | Around 3.2x better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
More cores | 2 | vs | 1 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.43 GHz | vs | 3.08 GHz | More than 10% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3.46 GHz | vs | 1.8 GHz | More than 90% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
| |||||||
Much 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 | 0.25 MB/core | 4x more l2 cache per core | |||
Much higher Maximum operating temperature | 80 °C | vs | 65.3 °C | Around 25% higher Maximum operating temperature | |||
Much lower typical power consumption | 16.25W | vs | 44.69W | 2.7x lower typical power consumption | |||
Much lower annual commercial energy cost | 17.52 $/year | vs | 48.18 $/year | 2.7x lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
Much lower annual home energy cost | 4.82 $/year | vs | 13.25 $/year | 2.7x lower annual home energy cost |
Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i3 3220 vs Athlon II 160u
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core i3 3220
5,399
Athlon II 160u
916
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core i3 3220
2,501
Athlon II 160u
894
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core i3 3220
173,000 MB/s
Athlon II 160u
71,200 MB/s
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
Core i3 3220
4,229
Athlon II 160u
556
PassMark (Single Core)
Core i3 3220
1,764
Athlon II 160u
557
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Core i3 3220 | vs | Athlon II 160u |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 3.3 GHz | 1.8 GHz | |
Cores | Dual core | Single core | |
features | |||
Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
Instruction set extensions | |||
SSE4a | |||
SSE2 | |||
MMX | |||
SSE4 | |||
AVX | |||
SSE3 | |||
SSE | |||
SSE4.1 | |||
SSE4.2 | |||
3DNow! | |||
Supplemental SSE3 | |||
AES | |||
Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes |
details | Core i3 3220 | vs | Athlon II 160u |
---|---|---|---|
Threads | 4 | 1 | |
L2 cache | 0.5 MB | 1 MB | |
L2 cache per core | 0.25 MB/core | 1 MB/core | |
Manufacture process | 22 nm | 45 nm | |
Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
Operating temperature | Unknown - 65.3°C | Unknown - 80°C | |
overclocking | |||
Overclocked clock speed | 3.43 GHz | 3.08 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 3.46 GHz | 1.8 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.43 GHz | 3.08 GHz | |
power consumption | |||
TDP | 55W | 20W | |
Annual home energy cost | 13.25 $/year | 4.82 $/year | |
Annual commercial energy cost | 48.18 $/year | 17.52 $/year | |
Performance per watt | 2.69 pt/W | 2.97 pt/W | |
Typical power consumption | 44.69W | 16.25W |
Intel Core i3 3220 ![]() | AMD Athlon II 160u ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$125 | $50 | |
3220 vs 5300 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$125 | ||
3220 vs Q6600 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$125 | $75 | |
3220 vs G2020 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$125 | $94 | |
3220 vs J2900 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$125 | ||
3220 vs 2500 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$125 | $82 | |
3220 vs J1900 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$125 | $179 | |
3220 vs E8400 | ||
Popular Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$305 | $300 | |
W3520 vs 2500 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$272 | $350 | |
4790K vs 6700K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
4200U vs 6410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$275 | $161 | |
4005U vs N3540 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$248 | $230 | |
4770K vs 9590 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$250 | $350 | |
6600K vs 6700K | ||