Athlon Neo MV-40 vs Pentium 4 P4 3.0
Aggregate performance score
Pentium 4 P4 3.0 outperforms Athlon Neo MV-40 by a significant 24% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Pentium 4 P4 3.0 and Athlon Neo MV-40 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3196 | 3260 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | Pentium 4 | AMD Athlon Neo |
| Power efficiency | 0.22 | 1.07 |
| Architecture codename | Northwood (2002−2004) | Huron (2009) |
| Release date | no data (2024 years ago) | 6 January 2009 (15 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Pentium 4 P4 3.0 and Athlon Neo MV-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 cores | 1 (Single-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 1 |
| Boost clock speed | 3 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Bus rate | 400 MHz | 1600 MHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | no data | 512 KB |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 65 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 95 °C |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Pentium 4 P4 3.0 and Athlon Neo MV-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.
| Socket | no data | ASB1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 89 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Pentium 4 P4 3.0 and Athlon Neo MV-40. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | MMX, 3DNow!, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, AMD64, Enhanced Virus Protection, Virtualization |
| VirusProtect | - | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Pentium 4 P4 3.0 and Athlon Neo MV-40 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
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.
3DMark06 CPU
3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.
wPrime 32
wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.21 | 0.17 |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 65 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 89 Watt | 15 Watt |
Pentium 4 P4 3.0 has a 23.5% higher aggregate performance score.
Athlon Neo MV-40, on the other hand, has a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 493.3% lower power consumption.
The Pentium 4 P4 3.0 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon Neo MV-40 in performance tests.
Note that Pentium 4 P4 3.0 is a desktop processor while Athlon Neo MV-40 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Pentium 4 P4 3.0 and Athlon Neo MV-40, 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.
