Athlon X4 845 vs Athlon 3000G

VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon 3000G
2019
2 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
2.82
+18%
Athlon X4 845
2016
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
2.39

Athlon 3000G outperforms Athlon X4 845 by a moderate 18% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon 3000G and Athlon X4 845 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking16811786
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation5.27no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Athlonno data
Power efficiency7.593.46
Architecture codenameZen+ (2018−2019)Carrizo (2015−2018)
Release date21 November 2019 (5 years ago)2 February 2016 (8 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$49no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Athlon 3000G and Athlon X4 845 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores2 (Dual-core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed3.5 GHz3.5 GHz
Boost clock speed3.5 GHz3.8 GHz
Bus typePCIe 3.0no data
Multiplier35no data
L1 cache96K (per core)320K
L2 cache512K (per core)2 MB
L3 cache4 MB (shared)no data
Chip lithography14 nm28 nm
Die size209.78 mm2?250 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data74 °C
Number of transistors4,800 million3,100 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility+no data
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on Athlon 3000G and Athlon X4 845 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketAM4FM2+
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 3000G and Athlon X4 845. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX++
PowerNow+-
Precision Boost 2+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 3000G and Athlon X4 845 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 3000G and Athlon X4 845. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Dual-channelDDR3-2133
Maximum memory size64 GB?no data
Maximum memory bandwidth42.671 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon Vega 3no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon 3000G and Athlon X4 845.

PCIe version3.03.0
PCI Express lanes68

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Athlon 3000G 2.82
+18%
Athlon X4 845 2.39

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Athlon 3000G 4477
+17.8%
Athlon X4 845 3799

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Athlon 3000G 957
+44.6%
Athlon X4 845 662

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Athlon 3000G 1959
+20.2%
Athlon X4 845 1630

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.82 2.39
Recency 21 November 2019 2 February 2016
Physical cores 2 4
Chip lithography 14 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 65 Watt

Athlon 3000G has a 18% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 85.7% lower power consumption.

Athlon X4 845, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores.

The Athlon 3000G is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon X4 845 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 3000G and Athlon X4 845, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD Athlon 3000G
Athlon 3000G
AMD Athlon X4 845
Athlon X4 845

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.9 2110 votes

Rate Athlon 3000G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 81 vote

Rate Athlon X4 845 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon 3000G or Athlon X4 845, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.