Are these processors about the same, "performance" wise...???

This thread has been Locked and is not open to further replies. Please start a New Thread if you're having a similar issue. View our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.


Thread Starter
Jun 9, 2000
I was looking at a couple of different PCs and see that two of my
choices have the following processors.

Intel® Core™ i3-530 processor(4MB Cache, 2.93GHz)

AMD Athlon II X2 250 Dual-Core 3.00GHz

Are these two processors similar or is one signifigantly better than
the other?


Oct 11, 2006
It depends on what you plan to use the computer for. For internet and basic used, I doubt you'll notice much difference. But the i3 is double the price. ($65 = AMD X2 250 vs $120 for the i3) They are not exactly in the same market.

Play with this benchmark:

Left 4 dead with a $300+ video card (GTX 280)
i3 530 = 108fps
X2 250= 98fps
X2 550= 114fps ($88 standard version)
X4 630= 95fps ($100 quad core)

Notice how a upper end AMD X2 is faster and still cheaper.

Video Rendering (Time in seconds, lower is better)
i3 530 = 38 seconds
X2 250= 52
X2 550= 50
X4 630= 34 ($99 CPU, bottom end quad core)

MS Excel test - lower is better

i3 530 = 32 seconds
X2 250= 61
X2 550= 50
X4 630= 36 ($99 CPU, bottom end quad core)

If buying a desktop computer (pre-built), An AMD CPU with an AMD chipset and using the onboard video will have a much better performance overall with the visuals on Windows7.

i3 systems have a more limited upgrade path... but who knows if that'll change.


Thread Starter
Jun 9, 2000
Thanks. These are the two systems that I am "considering" at the moment.

Now.... bear in mind, I am now using the same PC I bought for well over $1500 in 1999. A DELL Dimension XPS-T450 with a 13 gig HD (half full) with just 128MB of RAM and a 16MB video card. Believe it or not, for the most part I am OK with this system except that most newer programs don't run Win98se, which is my current operating system.

Now... considering the "ancient" PC I am using now, wouldn't "anything" on the market today blow this to bits? I mean, yes, I have a video card in here that's not :shared" but still I would think any new PC out there today would be a major, noticible upgrade right?

As far as my needs go, basically what I do now. Surf the internet, play a few games and do some photo editing. I do download some music and stuff like that but none of these so called "upper end" games that require a load of memory. I do plan on using Google Earth which I haven't been able to use up until now.

Money is a consideration so I do lean towards the HP. Wouldn't that, or again, ANY new system meet my needs?

Thanks again.

Oct 11, 2006
Well, yeah... that $430 HP is going to blow your old computer out of the water in every way. It has a bigger HD than the Dell which costs $100 more. The Dell is more expandable, game wise since it has a standard PCIe slot to handle a 3D gaming card. You'd still have to replace the PSU.

The HP doesn't have DVI or HDMI output - but it should be okay with a modern 22" monitor. HP is also using the rather old Nvidia 6150 bottom end chipset. (ugh) which isn't state of the art or as robust as an AMD chipset... :( But the HP is in a cuter case... but pretty much no way to upgrade it in the future. But since I build computers, such limitations bother me more than others. Don't expect todays off-shelf computers to last you another 10 years... which is a good long time for a computer.

Both systems (more so with HP) will be loaded with lots of CRAP-WARE that you'll need to uninstall / deactivate... as these "features" do a good job of slowing your computer down. Both will be almost silent compared to your old PC.

If you had the urge to build your own PC, you could build something expandable and low cost.
Top of my head:

$55 = AMD X2 240 CPU
$50 = 2GB of DDR3 (if you're not gaming - 2GB is enough)
$75 = Gigabyte 785G mobo with onboard video (DVI and VGA)
$55 = 500GB HD (SATA)
$80 = Case and power supply - Antec or Thermaltake (430 watt PSU)
$25 = DVD burner (SATA)
$30 = mouse & keyboard
$100 = Windows7 home premo (an actual CD!!!) - 32 or 64bit version.
$470 = total

Its the Win7 that hurts the most. The quality of PSU and motherboard are better than those Dells and HP. You'd also have a 2-3 year window to swap out the CPU for a 4~6 core version in the future for $60~90.

It takes about 15min to install Windows7 and it'll be a CLEAN install too. Not loaded with junk.
All you need is a magnetic screw driver (okay, it helps) as there are about 16~24 screws... thats about it.
Would you like a parts list?

The HP is cute and attractive... but they do run a bit warmer and if the PSU blows and youre out of warranty... that'll be a $60~80 part you'd have to order from HP.

If you have a printer and its old, you need to check for Win7 drivers.
This thread has been Locked and is not open to further replies. Please start a New Thread if you're having a similar issue. View our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

As Seen On
As Seen On...

Welcome to Tech Support Guy!

Are you looking for the solution to your computer problem? Join our site today to ask your question. This site is completely free -- paid for by advertisers and donations.

If you're not already familiar with forums, watch our Welcome Guide to get started.

Join over 807,865 other people just like you!

Latest posts

Members online