Pentium N3520 vs Athlon II X4 640
Aggregate performance score
Athlon II X4 640 outperforms Pentium N3520 by an impressive 96% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Athlon II X4 640 and Pentium N3520 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2198 | 2683 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.92 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Pentium |
| Power efficiency | 1.40 | 9.09 |
| Architecture codename | Propus (2009−2011) | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) |
| Release date | 11 May 2010 (14 years ago) | 1 December 2013 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $80 | $161 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Athlon II X4 640 and Pentium N3520 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 cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 3 GHz | 2.17 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 2.42 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 224 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 2 MB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 2 MB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | 169 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| Number of transistors | 300 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon II X4 640 and Pentium N3520 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 configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | AM3 | FCBGA1170 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 7.5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon II X4 640 and Pentium N3520. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Smart Connect | no data | + |
| RST | no data | - |
Security technologies
Athlon II X4 640 and Pentium N3520 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| EDB | no data | + |
| Secure Key | no data | + |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon II X4 640 and Pentium N3520 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | - |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon II X4 640 and Pentium N3520. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3L-1333 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel® HD Graphics for Intel Atom® Processor Z3700 Series |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 854 MHz |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Athlon II X4 640 and Pentium N3520 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 2 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon II X4 640 and Pentium N3520.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 4 |
| USB revision | no data | 3.0 and 2.0 |
| Total number of SATA ports | no data | 2 |
| Number of USB ports | no data | 5 |
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.
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.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.41 | 0.72 |
| Recency | 11 May 2010 | 1 December 2013 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 95 Watt | 7 Watt |
Athlon II X4 640 has a 95.8% higher aggregate performance score.
Pentium N3520, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 3 years, a 104.5% more advanced lithography process, and 1257.1% lower power consumption.
The Athlon II X4 640 is our recommended choice as it beats the Pentium N3520 in performance tests.
Note that Athlon II X4 640 is a desktop processor while Pentium N3520 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon II X4 640 and Pentium N3520, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
