Mobile Pentium 4 2.40 vs Athlon 64 3000+

Primary details

Comparing Athlon 64 3000+ and Mobile Pentium 4 2.40 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Architecture codenameClawhammer (2001−2005)Northwood (2002−2004)
Release dateJanuary 2001 (23 years ago)June 2003 (21 year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$65no data

Detailed specifications

Athlon 64 3000+ and Mobile Pentium 4 2.40 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 cores1 (Single-Core)1 (Single-Core)
Threads12
Boost clock speed2 GHz2.4 GHz
L1 cache128 KB8 KB
L2 cache512K512 KB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography130 nm130 nm
Die size193 mm2131 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data71 °C
Number of transistors154 million55 million
64 bit support+-
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Athlon 64 3000+ and Mobile Pentium 4 2.40 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 configuration11
Socket754478
Power consumption (TDP)89 Watt60 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 3000+ and Mobile Pentium 4 2.40. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Hyper-Threading Technologyno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 3000+ and Mobile Pentium 4 2.40. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR1, DDR2

Synthetic benchmark performance

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



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 64 3000+ 334
+26.5%
Mobile Pentium 4 2.40 264

Pros & cons summary


Threads 1 2
Power consumption (TDP) 89 Watt 60 Watt

Mobile Pentium 4 2.40 has 100% more threads, and 48.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Athlon 64 3000+ and Mobile Pentium 4 2.40. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that Athlon 64 3000+ is a desktop processor while Mobile Pentium 4 2.40 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 3000+ and Mobile Pentium 4 2.40, 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 64 3000+
Athlon 64 3000+
Intel Mobile Pentium 4 2.40
Mobile Pentium 4 2.40

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.


3.4 113 votes

Rate Athlon 64 3000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 1 vote

Rate Mobile Pentium 4 2.40 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon 64 3000+ or Mobile Pentium 4 2.40, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.