A4 Micro-6400T vs Athlon II X2 250

A4 Micro-6400T vs Athlon II X2 250 Performance Spectrum

A4 Micro-6400T

4 / 4

1,082

+0.2%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Athlon II X2 250

2 / 2

1,080

0.0%

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 Micro-6400T 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 Micro-6400T 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 Micro-6400T

2014

Why buy it

✅+0.2% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 5W instead of 65W, a 60W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R3, while Athlon II X2 250 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Athlon II X2 250.

Athlon II X2 250

2009

Why buy it

✅Includes a boxed cooler (true), unlike A4 Micro-6400T.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,080 vs 1,082).
❌Launch MSRP is still $87 MSRP, while A4 Micro-6400T mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌1200% higher power demand at 65W vs 5W.
❌No integrated graphics, while A4 Micro-6400T can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is A4 Micro-6400T better than Athlon II X2 250?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Athlon II X2 250 is ahead with a 0.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, A4 Micro-6400T pulls ahead with 0.2% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A4 Micro-6400T is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

A4 Micro-6400T is still the much better call for a fresh build. A4 Micro-6400T comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $87 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.2% better PassMark. Athlon II X2 250 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2009 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (12.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on AM3.

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

A4 Micro-6400T makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2009) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A4 Micro-6400T vs Athlon II X2 250 Technical Specifications

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

A4 Micro-6400T

The A4 Micro-6400T is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 29 April 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Mullins (2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1 GHz, with boost up to 1.6 GHz. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1333. Passmark benchmark score: 1,082 points. Launch price was $69.

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

The A4 Micro-6400T packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Athlon II X2 250 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the A4 Micro-6400T has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.6 GHz on the A4 Micro-6400T versus 3 GHz on the Athlon II X2 250 — a 60.9% clock advantage for the Athlon II X2 250 (base: 1 GHz vs 3 GHz). The A4 Micro-6400T uses the Mullins (2014) architecture (28 nm), while the Athlon II X2 250 uses Regor (2009−2013) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A4 Micro-6400T scores 1,082 against the Athlon II X2 250's 1,080 — a 0.2% lead for the A4 Micro-6400T.

Feature	A4 Micro-6400T	Athlon II X2 250
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.6 GHz	3 GHz+87%
Base Clock	1 GHz	3 GHz+200%
L3 Cache	—	0 kB
L2 Cache	2048 kB	2 MB
Process	28 nm-38%	45 nm
Architecture	Mullins (2014)	Regor (2009−2013)
PassMark	1,082	1,080
Geekbench 6 Single	180	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4 Micro-6400T uses the FT3 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Athlon II X2 250 uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3L-1333 memory speed. The Athlon II X2 250 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (A4 Micro-6400T) vs 2 (Athlon II X2 250). PCIe lanes: 8 (A4 Micro-6400T) vs 0 (Athlon II X2 250) — the A4 Micro-6400T offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A4 Micro-6400T	Athlon II X2 250
Socket	FT3	AM3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3L-1333	1333
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	16 GB+100%
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	8	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4 Micro-6400T) vs true (Athlon II X2 250). The A4 Micro-6400T includes integrated graphics (Radeon R3), while the Athlon II X2 250 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4 Micro-6400T targets Tablet. Direct competitor: A4 Micro-6400T rivals Atom Z3770; Athlon II X2 250 rivals Pentium E5700.