Core i3-530 vs Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80

Core i3-530 vs Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 Performance Spectrum

Core i3-530

2 / 4

1,516

+0.9%

Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80

2 / 2

1,503

0.0%

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 i3-530 vs Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 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 i3-530 vs Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i3-530

2010

Why buy it

✅+0.9% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $113 MSRP, while Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌3550% higher power demand at 73W vs 2W.

Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80

2008

Why buy it

✅Draws 2W instead of 73W, a 71W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,503 vs 1,516).

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-530 better than Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 is ahead with a 1.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-530 pulls ahead with 0.9% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-530 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.9% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core i3-530 is the better buy right now. Core i3-530 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $113 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.9% better PassMark. The compromise is that Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 1.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (13.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Core i3-530 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2010 vs 2008) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i3-530 vs Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-530

The Core i3-530 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 7 January 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Clarkdale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.93 GHz, with boost up to 0.93 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1156. Thermal design power (TDP): 73 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,516 points. Launch price was $60.

Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80

The Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Puma (2008−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2.1 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: S1g2. Thermal design power (TDP): 2 MB. Memory support: DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 1,503 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i3-530 packs 2 cores / 4 threads, matching the Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 0.93 GHz on the Core i3-530 versus 2.1 GHz on the Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 — a 77.2% clock advantage for the Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80. The Core i3-530 uses the Clarkdale (2010−2011) architecture (32 nm), while the Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 uses Puma (2008−2009) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-530 scores 1,516 against the Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80's 1,503 — a 0.9% lead for the Core i3-530. L3 cache: 4 MB (total) on the Core i3-530 vs 0 kB on the Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80.

Feature	Core i3-530	Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	2 / 2
Boost Clock	0.93 GHz	2.1 GHz+126%
Base Clock	2.93 GHz	—
L3 Cache	4 MB (total)	0 kB
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	2 MB+700%
Process	32 nm-51%	65 nm
Architecture	Clarkdale (2010−2011)	Puma (2008−2009)
PassMark	1,516	1,503

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-530 uses the LGA1156 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 uses S1g2 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.