Athlon 64 3000+
Opteron 142
Athlon 64 3000+ vs Opteron 142 Performance Spectrum
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.
Athlon 64 3000+ vs Opteron 142 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.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Among Us
Apex Legends
ARC Raiders
Baldur's Gate 3
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
Athlon 64 3000+ vs Opteron 142: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
Athlon 64 3000+
2001Why buy it
- ✅Costs $143 less on MSRP ($149 MSRP vs $292 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 98.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 3.0 vs 1.5 PassMark/$ ($149 MSRP vs $292 MSRP).
Trade-offs
- ❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.
Opteron 142
2003Why buy it
- ✅Draws 85W instead of 89W, a 4W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (445 vs 450).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 1.5 vs 3.0 PassMark/$ ($292 MSRP vs $149 MSRP).
Quick Answers
So, is Athlon 64 3000+ better than Opteron 142?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Athlon 64 3000+ vs Opteron 142 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
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+51100% | 1 MB |
| 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 -16.8% 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 — 100% 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 | No | Yes |
| 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
At launch, the Athlon 64 3000+ was priced at $149, while the Opteron 142 came in at $292. On launch pricing ($149 vs $292), Athlon 64 3000+ was $143 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon 64 3000+ delivers 3.0 pts/$ vs 1.5 pts/$ for the Opteron 142 — making the Athlon 64 3000+ the 65.9% better value option.
| Feature | Athlon 64 3000+ | Opteron 142 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $149-49% | $292 |
| Performance per Dollar | 3.0+100% | 1.5 |
| Release Date | 2001 | 2003 |
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.
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
