CPU
GPU
Athlon 64 3000+
Opteron 142
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Athlon 64 3000+ is positioned at rank 1095 and the Opteron 142 is on rank 1025, so the Opteron 142 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Athlon 64 3000+
Performance Per Dollar Opteron 142
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon 64 3000+ | Opteron 142 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($10) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Clawhammer (2001−2005) / 130 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (SledgeHammer (2003−2005) / 130 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon 64 3000+ | Opteron 142 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+102%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($10) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) |
Performance Check
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Athlon 64 3000+ and Opteron 142
Athlon 64 3000+
The Athlon 64 3000+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Janeiro 2001 (24 years ago). It is based on the Clawhammer (2001−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: 754. Thermal design power (TDP): 89 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 450 points. Launch price was $65.
Opteron 142
The Opteron 142 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2015-01-01. It is based on the SledgeHammer (2003−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: 940. Thermal design power (TDP): 85 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 445 points. Launch price was $800.
Processing Power
Both the Athlon 64 3000+ and Opteron 142 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Athlon 64 3000+ versus 1.6 GHz on the Opteron 142 — a 22.2% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 3000+. The Athlon 64 3000+ uses the Clawhammer (2001−2005) architecture (130 nm), while the Opteron 142 uses SledgeHammer (2003−2005) (130 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 3000+ scores 450 against the Opteron 142's 445 — a 1.1% lead for the Athlon 64 3000+. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Athlon 64 3000+ | Opteron 142 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 2 GHz+25% | 1.6 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 512K | 1 MB+100% |
| Process | 130 nm | 130 nm |
| Architecture | Clawhammer (2001−2005) | SledgeHammer (2003−2005) |
| PassMark | 450+1% | 445 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon 64 3000+ uses the 754 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Opteron 142 uses 940 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR-400 on the Athlon 64 3000+ versus DDR-333 on the Opteron 142 — the Opteron 142 supports -18.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Opteron 142 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 0 PCIe lanes.
| Feature | Athlon 64 3000+ | Opteron 142 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | 754 | 940 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR-400 | DDR-333 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ✅ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Athlon 64 3000+) / AMD-V (Opteron 142). Primary use case: Opteron 142 targets Server.
| Feature | Athlon 64 3000+ | Opteron 142 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | AMD-V |
| Target Use | — | Server |
Value Analysis
The Athlon 64 3000+ launched at $149 MSRP, while the Opteron 142 debuted at $292. At current prices ($10 vs $20), the Athlon 64 3000+ is $10 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon 64 3000+ delivers 45.0 pts/$ vs 22.3 pts/$ for the Opteron 142 — making the Athlon 64 3000+ the 67.7% better value option.
| Feature | Athlon 64 3000+ | Opteron 142 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-49% | $292 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $10-50% | $20 |
| Performance per Dollar | 45.0+102% | 22.3 |
| Release Date | 2001 | 2003 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Athlon 64 3000+ and Opteron 142
