A6-3420M vs Athlon II X3 400e

A6-3420M vs Athlon II X3 400e Performance Spectrum

A6-3420M

4 / 4

1,310

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Athlon II X3 400e

3 / 3

1,320

+0.8%

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.

A6-3420M vs Athlon II X3 400e 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.

A6-3420M vs Athlon II X3 400e: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A6-3420M

2011

Why buy it

✅Draws 35W instead of 45W, a 10W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 6520G, while Athlon II X3 400e needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,310 vs 1,320).

Athlon II X3 400e

2009

Why buy it

✅+0.8% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $100 MSRP, while A6-3420M mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌28.6% higher power demand at 45W vs 35W.
❌No integrated graphics, while A6-3420M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is A6-3420M better than Athlon II X3 400e?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A6-3420M is ahead with a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Athlon II X3 400e pulls ahead with 0.8% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Athlon II X3 400e is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.8% better PassMark, backed by 3 cores and 3 threads.

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

A6-3420M is still the much better call for a fresh build. A6-3420M comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $100 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Athlon II X3 400e only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2009 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (13.2 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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?

A6-3420M 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.

A6-3420M vs Athlon II X3 400e Technical Specifications

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

A6-3420M

The A6-3420M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Llano (2011−2012) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FS1. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,310 points. Launch price was $70.

Athlon II X3 400e

The Athlon II X3 400e is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 20 October 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Rana (2009−2011) architecture. It features 3 cores and 3 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,320 points. Launch price was $107.

⚡

Processing Power

The A6-3420M packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Athlon II X3 400e offers 3 cores / 3 threads — the A6-3420M has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the A6-3420M versus 2.2 GHz on the Athlon II X3 400e — a 8.7% clock advantage for the A6-3420M (base: 1.5 GHz vs 2.2 GHz). The A6-3420M uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Athlon II X3 400e uses Rana (2009−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A6-3420M scores 1,310 against the Athlon II X3 400e's 1,320 — a 0.8% lead for the Athlon II X3 400e. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	A6-3420M	Athlon II X3 400e
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+33%	3 / 3
Boost Clock	2.4 GHz+9%	2.2 GHz
Base Clock	1.5 GHz	2.2 GHz+47%
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)+100%	512 kB (per core)
Process	32 nm-29%	45 nm
Architecture	Llano (2011−2012)	Rana (2009−2011)
PassMark	1,310	1,320
Geekbench 6 Single	234	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A6-3420M uses the FS1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Athlon II X3 400e uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1333 memory speed. The Athlon II X3 400e supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (A6-3420M) vs 0 (Athlon II X3 400e) — the A6-3420M offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A6-3420M	Athlon II X3 400e
Socket	FS1	AM3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	32 GB+300%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (A6-3420M) / not specified (Athlon II X3 400e). The A6-3420M includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 6520G), while the Athlon II X3 400e requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A6-3420M targets Budget Laptop. Direct competitor: A6-3420M rivals Core i3-2330M.