Notebookcheck Logo

AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-82 vs AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-85

AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-82

► remove from comparison

The AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-82 is a dual core processor for laptops based on the Griffin core (Puma platform). It was introduced in 2008 and based on a mixture of the old K8 architecture (cores) and more modern K10 architecture (memory controller, HyperTransport links, crossbar). A novelty of the ZM series, is the possibility to change to power states of the cores and the memory controller independently to save power.

Compared to the Turion 64 X2 RM series, the Ultra models offer twice as much level 2 cache. The Athlon X2 QL models are also based on the same architecture but offer only reduced power saving functions (p-states).

Due to the bigger level 2 cache and the K10 parts, the ZM series is noticeable faster than the older generation. However, the performance and power efficiency is still not on par with the Core 2 Duo series by Intel. Therefore, the performance of the ZM-82 was only in the lower mid-range at the time of announcement.

AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-85

► remove from comparison

The AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-85 is a dual core processor for laptops based on the Griffin core (Puma platform). With 2.3 GHz it is the second fastest processor of the ZM-series. Compared to the ZM-84, the ZM-85 offers a faster HyperTransport link clocked at 2.2 GHz. It was introduced in 2008 and based on a mixture of the old K8 architecture (cores) and more modern K10 architecture (memory controller, HyperTransport links, crossbar). A novelty of the ZM series, is the possibility to change to power states of the cores and the memory controller independently to save power.

Compared to the Turion 64 X2 RM series, the Ultra models offer twice as much level 2 cache. The Athlon X2 QL models are also based on the same architecture but offer only reduced power saving functions (p-states).

Due to the bigger level 2 cache and the K10 parts, the ZM series is noticeable faster than the older generation. However, the performance and power efficiency is still not on par with the Core 2 Duo series by Intel. Therefore, the performance of the ZM-85 was only in the middle class at the time of announcement.

ModelAMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-82AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-85
SeriesAMD Turion X2 UltraAMD Turion X2 Ultra
CodenamePumaPuma
Series: Turion X2 Ultra Puma
AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-852.3 GHz2 / 2
AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-84 compare2.3 GHz2 / 2
» AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-822.2 GHz2 / 2
AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 compare2.1 GHz2 / 2
» AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-852.3 GHz2 / 2
AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-84 compare2.3 GHz2 / 2
AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-822.2 GHz2 / 2
AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-80 compare2.1 GHz2 / 2
Clock2200 MHz2300 MHz
FSB36004400
L2 Cache2 MB2 MB
Cores / Threads2 / 22 / 2
TDP35 Watt35 Watt
Technology65 nm65 nm
SocketS1g2S1g2
FeaturesMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, Enhanced 3DNow!, NX bit, AMD64, PowerNow!, AMD Virtualization, Dual-Channel DDR2 memory ControllerMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, Enhanced 3DNow!, NX bit, AMD64, PowerNow!, AMD Virtualization, Dual Channel DDR2 memory controller
Architecturex86x86
Announced
ManufacturerAMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-82AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-85

Benchmarks

Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (32bit)
100%
1 ZM-82 +
min: 1774     avg: 1777     median: 1776.5 (16%)     max: 1779 Points
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Multi (32bit)
100%
1 ZM-82 +
min: 3234     avg: 3381     median: 3441 (5%)     max: 3468 Points
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 1024m *
100%
1 ZM-85 +
1159 s (14%)
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 32m *
100%
1 ZM-85 +
36.5 s (7%)
3DMark 06 - CPU - 3DMark 06 - CPU
100%
1 ZM-82 +
min: 1505     avg: 1536     median: 1546 (3%)     max: 1556 Points
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M *
min: 42.25     avg: 43.1     median: 43.4 (9%)     max: 43.62 s
40.2 s (9%)
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 32M *
2269 s (10%)
2195 s (10%)
SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS) - SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS)
100%
1 ZM-82 +
14614 MIPS (7%)
SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS) - SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS)
100%
1 ZM-82 +
14263 MFLOPS (11%)
PCMark 05 - PCMark 05 - Standard
min: 3690     avg: 3968     median: 3818 (24%)     max: 4545 Points
5321 Points (33%)
3DMark Vantage - 3DM Vant. Perf. CPU no Physx
100%
1 ZM-82 +
2912 Points (3%)

Average Benchmarks AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-82 → 100% n=3

Average Benchmarks AMD Turion X2 Ultra ZM-85 → 113% n=3

- Range of benchmark values for this graphics card
- Average benchmark values for this graphics card
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance
1 This benchmark is not used for the average calculation

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

restrict list:

show all (including archived), 2022, 2021
v1.17
log 01. 00:09:57

#0 checking url part for id 402 +0s ... 0s

#1 checking url part for id 1201 +0s ... 0s

#2 not redirecting to Ajax server +0s ... 0s

#3 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Mon, 27 Jun 2022 13:12:58 +0200 +0s ... 0s

#4 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.002s ... 0.002s

#5 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.002s

#6 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.003s

#7 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.003s

#8 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.003s

#9 composed specs +0s ... 0.003s

#10 did output specs +0s ... 0.003s

#11 getting avg benchmarks for device 402 +0s ... 0.003s

#12 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.003s

#13 got single benchmarks 402 +0.012s ... 0.016s

#14 getting avg benchmarks for device 1201 +0.001s ... 0.016s

#15 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.001s ... 0.017s

#16 got single benchmarks 1201 +0.005s ... 0.022s

#17 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.022s

#18 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.022s

#19 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.023s

#20 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0.001s ... 0.023s

#21 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.023s

#22 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.024s

#23 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.024s

#24 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.024s

#25 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.024s

#26 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.024s

#27 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.025s

#28 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.025s

#29 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.025s

#30 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.025s

#31 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.025s

#32 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.026s

#33 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.026s

#34 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.026s

#35 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.026s

#36 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0s ... 0.027s

#37 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.027s

#38 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.027s

#39 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.027s

#40 linkCache_getLink no uid found +0s ... 0.027s

#41 min, max, avg, median took s +0s ... 0.027s

#42 linkCache_getLink using $NBC_LINKCACHE +0.025s ... 0.052s

#43 return log +0.004s ... 0.056s

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Benchmarks / Tech > Processor Comparison - Head 2 Head
Redaktion, 2017-09- 8 (Update: 2017-09-11)