Athlon II X2 255 vs Ryzen 3 2200G

Aggregate performance score

Ryzen 3 2200G
2018
4 cores / 4 threads, 65 Watt
4.40
+479%

Ryzen 3 2200G outperforms Athlon II X2 255 by a whopping 479% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Ryzen 3 2200G and Athlon II X2 255 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking13642660
Place by popularity91not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation8.790.02
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Ryzen 3no data
Power efficiency6.201.07
Architecture codenameRaven Ridge (2017−2018)Regor (2009−2013)
Release date8 January 2018 (6 years ago)25 January 2010 (14 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$99$60

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ryzen 3 2200G has 43850% better value for money than Athlon II X2 255.

Detailed specifications

Ryzen 3 2200G and Athlon II X2 255 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed3.5 GHz3.1 GHz
Boost clock speed3.5 GHz3.1 GHz
Multiplier35no data
L1 cache384 KB128 KB
L2 cache2 MB1 MB
L3 cache4 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm45 nm
Die size209.78 mm2117 mm2
Number of transistors4950 Million410 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Ryzen 3 2200G and Athlon II X2 255 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketAM4AM3
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Ryzen 3 2200G and Athlon II X2 255. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsXFR, FMA3, SSE 4.2, AVX2, SMTno data
AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-
Precision Boost 2+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Ryzen 3 2200G and Athlon II X2 255 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Ryzen 3 2200G and Athlon II X2 255. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Dual-channelDDR3
Maximum memory size64 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth46.933 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon RX Vega 8 (Ryzen 2000/3000)no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Ryzen 3 2200G and Athlon II X2 255.

PCIe version3.02.0
PCI Express lanes12no 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.


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.

Ryzen 3 2200G 4.40
+479%
Athlon II X2 255 0.76

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.

Ryzen 3 2200G 6756
+475%
Athlon II X2 255 1175

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.

Ryzen 3 2200G 998
+241%
Athlon II X2 255 293

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.

Ryzen 3 2200G 2840
+605%
Athlon II X2 255 403

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 4.40 0.76
Recency 8 January 2018 25 January 2010
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 14 nm 45 nm

Ryzen 3 2200G has a 478.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 221.4% more advanced lithography process.

The Ryzen 3 2200G is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon II X2 255 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Ryzen 3 2200G and Athlon II X2 255, 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 Ryzen 3 2200G
Ryzen 3 2200G
AMD Athlon II X2 255
Athlon II X2 255

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.


4 2264 votes

Rate Ryzen 3 2200G on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 175 votes

Rate Athlon II X2 255 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Ryzen 3 2200G or Athlon II X2 255, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.