Athlon 64 3500+ vs FX-4300

VS

Primary details

Comparing FX-4300 and Athlon 64 3500+ processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1971not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.27no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency1.87no data
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)San Diego (2001−2005)
Release date23 October 2012 (12 years ago)January 2001 (23 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$122$59

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

FX-4300 and Athlon 64 3500+ 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)1 (Single-Core)
Threads41
Base clock speed3.8 GHzno data
Boost clock speed4 GHz2.2 GHz
L1 cacheno data128 KB
L2 cache4096 KB512 KB
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm130 nm
Die size315 mm2230 mm2
Maximum core temperature71 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,200 million227 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.225 V - Max: 1.3875 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-4300 and Athlon 64 3500+ 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
SocketAM3+939
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt89 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-4300 and Athlon 64 3500+. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-4300 and Athlon 64 3500+ are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-4300 and Athlon 64 3500+. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-4300 and Athlon 64 3500+.

PCIe versionn/ano data

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.

FX-4300 2985
+692%
Athlon 64 3500+ 377

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.

FX-4300 453
+251%
Athlon 64 3500+ 129

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.

FX-4300 1103
+851%
Athlon 64 3500+ 116

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 4 1
Threads 4 1
Chip lithography 32 nm 130 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 89 Watt

FX-4300 has 300% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 306.3% more advanced lithography process.

Athlon 64 3500+, on the other hand, has 6.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between FX-4300 and Athlon 64 3500+. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-4300 and Athlon 64 3500+, 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 FX-4300
FX-4300
AMD Athlon 64 3500+
Athlon 64 3500+

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.


3.8 1723 votes

Rate FX-4300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 52 votes

Rate Athlon 64 3500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-4300 or Athlon 64 3500+, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.