A4-3420 vs Athlon II X2 250

CPU

GPU

A4-3420

2 Cores2 Thrd65 WWMax: 2.8 GHz2011

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Athlon II X2 250

2 Cores2 Thrd65 WWMax: 3 GHz2009

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

A4-3420 vs Athlon II X2 250 Performance Spectrum

A4-3420

2 / 2

1,067

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Athlon II X2 250

2 / 2

1,080

+1.2%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

A4-3420 vs Athlon II X2 250 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

A4-3420 vs Athlon II X2 250: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

A4-3420

2011

Why buy it

✅Costs $22 less on MSRP ($65 MSRP vs $87 MSRP).
✅Delivers 32.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 16.4 vs 12.4 PassMark/$ ($65 MSRP vs $87 MSRP).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 6410D, while Athlon II X2 250 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,067 vs 1,080).

Athlon II X2 250

2009

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.4 vs 16.4 PassMark/$ ($87 MSRP vs $65 MSRP).
❌No integrated graphics, while A4-3420 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon II X2 250 better than A4-3420?

Yes. Athlon II X2 250 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 1.2% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Athlon II X2 250 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.2% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Athlon II X2 250 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Athlon II X2 250 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Athlon II X2 250 comes in 33.8% more expensive on MSRP at $87 MSRP versus $65 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. A4-3420 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2011 platform. Even with 32.2% better value on paper (16.4 vs 12.4 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on FM1.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

A4-3420 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2009). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A4-3420 vs Athlon II X2 250 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

A4-3420

The A4-3420 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Llano (2011−2012) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM1. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,067 points. Launch price was $50.

Athlon II X2 250

The Athlon II X2 250 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2 June 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Regor (2009−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,080 points. Launch price was $39.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A4-3420 and Athlon II X2 250 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the A4-3420 versus 3 GHz on the Athlon II X2 250 — a 6.9% clock advantage for the Athlon II X2 250 (base: 2.8 GHz vs 3 GHz). The A4-3420 uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Athlon II X2 250 uses Regor (2009−2013) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A4-3420 scores 1,067 against the Athlon II X2 250's 1,080 — a 1.2% lead for the Athlon II X2 250. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	A4-3420	Athlon II X2 250
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.8 GHz	3 GHz+7%
Base Clock	2.8 GHz	3 GHz+7%
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	2 MB+300%
Process	32 nm-29%	45 nm
Architecture	Llano (2011−2012)	Regor (2009−2013)
PassMark	1,067	1,080+1%
Geekbench 6 Single	300	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	500	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-3420 uses the FM1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Athlon II X2 250 uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the A4-3420 versus 1333 on the Athlon II X2 250 — the A4-3420 supports 20% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A4-3420 supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (A4-3420) vs 0 (Athlon II X2 250) — the A4-3420 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: A55,A75,A85X (A4-3420) and AM2+,AM3 (Athlon II X2 250).

Feature	A4-3420	Athlon II X2 250
Socket	FM1	AM3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600+20%	1333
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB+100%	16 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4-3420) vs true (Athlon II X2 250). The A4-3420 includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 6410D), while the Athlon II X2 250 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-3420 targets Entry Desktop. Direct competitor: A4-3420 rivals Pentium G630; Athlon II X2 250 rivals Pentium E5700.

Feature	A4-3420	Athlon II X2 250
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Radeon HD 6410D	None
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	AMD-V	true
Target Use	Entry Desktop	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the A4-3420 was priced at $65, while the Athlon II X2 250 came in at $87. On launch pricing ($65 vs $87), A4-3420 was $22 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the A4-3420 delivers 16.4 pts/$ vs 12.4 pts/$ for the Athlon II X2 250 — making the A4-3420 the 27.8% better value option.

Feature	A4-3420	Athlon II X2 250
MSRP	$65-25%	$87
Performance per Dollar	16.4+32%	12.4
Release Date	2011	2009

Search A4-3420 on Amazon

Search Athlon II X2 250 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.