Core 2 Solo SU3300 vs Z-60

Core 2 Solo SU3300 vs Z-60 Performance Spectrum

Core 2 Solo SU3300

1 / 1

1,247

0.0%

1,249

+0.2%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Core 2 Solo SU3300 vs Z-60 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core 2 Solo SU3300 vs Z-60: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core 2 Solo SU3300

2008

Why buy it

✅Draws 3W instead of 5W, a 2W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,247 vs 1,249).
❌Launch MSRP is still $262 MSRP, while Z-60 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while Z-60 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Z-60

2012

Why buy it

✅+0.2% higher PassMark.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 6250, while Core 2 Solo SU3300 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌66.7% higher power demand at 5W vs 3W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core 2 Solo SU3300 better than Z-60?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core 2 Solo SU3300 is ahead with a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Z-60 pulls ahead with 0.2% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Z-60 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core 2 Solo SU3300 is the better buy right now. Core 2 Solo SU3300 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $262 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Z-60 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.2% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (4.8 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Z-60 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2008) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 1/1. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core 2 Solo SU3300 vs Z-60 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core 2 Solo SU3300

The Core 2 Solo SU3300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 August 2008 (17 years ago). It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.2 GHz. L2 cache: 3 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: BGA956. Thermal design power (TDP): 3 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,247 points. Launch price was $262.

Z-60

The Z-60 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 9 October 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Hondo (2012) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 40 nm process technology. Socket: FT1. Thermal design power (TDP): 5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3 Single-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 1,249 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core 2 Solo SU3300 packs 1 cores / 1 threads, while the Z-60 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Z-60 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 1.2 GHz on the Core 2 Solo SU3300 versus 1 GHz on the Z-60 — a 18.2% clock advantage for the Core 2 Solo SU3300. The Core 2 Solo SU3300 uses the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Z-60 uses Hondo (2012) (40 nm). In PassMark, the Core 2 Solo SU3300 scores 1,247 against the Z-60's 1,249 — a 0.2% lead for the Z-60.

Feature	Core 2 Solo SU3300	Z-60
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	2 / 2+100%
Boost Clock	1.2 GHz+20%	1 GHz
L3 Cache	—	0 kB
L2 Cache	3 MB+200%	1 MB
Process	45 nm	40 nm-11%
Architecture	Penryn (2008−2011)	Hondo (2012)
PassMark	1,247	1,249
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	658

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core 2 Solo SU3300 uses the BGA956 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Z-60 uses FT1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-800 on the Core 2 Solo SU3300 versus DDR3-1066 on the Z-60 — the Z-60 supports 33.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both feature 1-channel memory with ECC support.

Feature	Core 2 Solo SU3300	Z-60
Socket	BGA956	FT1
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 2.0+82%
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-800	DDR3-1066+33%
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	—
RAM Channels	1	1
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Core 2 Solo SU3300) vs AMD-V (Z-60). The Z-60 includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 6250), while the Core 2 Solo SU3300 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core 2 Solo SU3300 targets Mobile, Z-60 targets Tablet. Direct competitor: Z-60 rivals Core i3-2310M.