Ryzen 3 3250U vs Athlon 64 X2 5200+

VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon 64 X2 5200+
2006
2 cores / 2 threads, 89 Watt
0.54
Ryzen 3 3250U
2020
2 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
2.40
+344%

Ryzen 3 3250U outperforms Athlon 64 X2 5200+ by a whopping 344% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon 64 X2 5200+ and Ryzen 3 3250U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking28391768
Place by popularitynot in top-10096
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD Ryzen 3
Power efficiency0.5715.14
Architecture codenameWindsor (2006−2007)Picasso (2019−2022)
Release dateSeptember 2006 (18 years ago)6 January 2020 (4 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Athlon 64 X2 5200+ and Ryzen 3 3250U 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads24
Base clock speedno data2.6 GHz
Boost clock speed2.7 GHz3.5 GHz
Multiplierno data26
L1 cache256 KB192 KB
L2 cache512K1 MB
L3 cache0 KB4 MB (shared)
Chip lithography90 nm14 nm
Die size220 mm2246 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data95 °C
Number of transistors154 million4500 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Athlon 64 X2 5200+ and Ryzen 3 3250U 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
SocketAM2FP5
Power consumption (TDP)89 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 X2 5200+ and Ryzen 3 3250U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 64 X2 5200+ and Ryzen 3 3250U are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 X2 5200+ and Ryzen 3 3250U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data32 GB
Max memory channelsno data2
Maximum memory bandwidthno data38.397 GB/s

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon RX Vega 3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon 64 X2 5200+ and Ryzen 3 3250U.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data12

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 64 X2 5200+ 0.54
Ryzen 3 3250U 2.40
+344%

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 X2 5200+ 851
Ryzen 3 3250U 3807
+347%

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 64 X2 5200+ 253
Ryzen 3 3250U 749
+196%

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 64 X2 5200+ 442
Ryzen 3 3250U 1455
+229%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.54 2.40
Threads 2 4
Chip lithography 90 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 89 Watt 15 Watt

Ryzen 3 3250U has a 344.4% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more threads, a 542.9% more advanced lithography process, and 493.3% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen 3 3250U is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon 64 X2 5200+ in performance tests.

Note that Athlon 64 X2 5200+ is a desktop processor while Ryzen 3 3250U is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 X2 5200+ and Ryzen 3 3250U, 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 X2 5200+
Athlon 64 X2 5200+
AMD Ryzen 3 3250U
Ryzen 3 3250U

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.


3.5 311 votes

Rate Athlon 64 X2 5200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 2115 votes

Rate Ryzen 3 3250U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon 64 X2 5200+ or Ryzen 3 3250U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.