Athlon 64 3000+ vs Turion 64 MT-30

AMD

Athlon 64 3000+

1 Cores1 Thrd89 WWMax: 2 GHz2001
VS
AMD

Turion 64 MT-30

1 Cores1 Thrd1 WWMax: 1.6 GHz2005

Athlon 64 3000+ vs Turion 64 MT-30 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 Turion 64 MT-30 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.

Athlon 64 3000+ vs Turion 64 MT-30: 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+

2001

Why buy it

    Trade-offs

    • ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Turion 64 MT-30 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
    • ❌Lower PassMark (450 vs 475).
    • ❌Launch MSRP is still $149 MSRP, while Turion 64 MT-30 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
    • ❌8800% higher power demand at 89W vs 1W.

    Turion 64 MT-30

    2005

    Why buy it

    • βœ…Better for gaming: +8.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
    • βœ…Draws 1W instead of 89W, a 88W reduction.

    Trade-offs

    • ❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

    Quick Answers

    So, is Turion 64 MT-30 better than Athlon 64 3000+?
    Yes. Turion 64 MT-30 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 8.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 5.6% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.
    Which one is better for gaming?
    If gaming is the priority, Turion 64 MT-30 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 8.7% 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, Turion 64 MT-30 is the stronger fit. You are getting 5.6% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.
    Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
    Turion 64 MT-30 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Turion 64 MT-30 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $149 MSRP, and it still gives you a 8.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Athlon 64 3000+ only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2001 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (3.0 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on 754.
    Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
    Turion 64 MT-30 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2005 vs 2001) and more multi-core headroom with 1 cores / 1 threads instead of 1/1. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

    Athlon 64 3000+ vs Turion 64 MT-30 Technical Specifications

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

    AMD

    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 (2001βˆ’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.

    AMD

    Turion 64 MT-30

    The Turion 64 MT-30 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Lancaster (2005βˆ’2006) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: 754. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 475 points. Launch price was $69.

    ⚑

    Processing Power

    Both the Athlon 64 3000+ and Turion 64 MT-30 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Athlon 64 3000+ versus 1.6 GHz on the Turion 64 MT-30 β€” a 22.2% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 3000+. The Athlon 64 3000+ uses the Clawhammer (2001βˆ’2005) architecture (130 nm), while the Turion 64 MT-30 uses Lancaster (2005βˆ’2006) (90 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 3000+ scores 450 against the Turion 64 MT-30's 475 β€” a 5.4% lead for the Turion 64 MT-30. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

    FeatureAthlon 64 3000+Turion 64 MT-30
    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
    90 nm-31%
    Architecture
    Clawhammer (2001βˆ’2005)
    Lancaster (2005βˆ’2006)
    PassMark
    450
    475+6%
    🧠

    Memory & Platform

    Both processors use the 754 socket with PCIe 1.1.

    FeatureAthlon 64 3000+Turion 64 MT-30
    Socket
    754
    754
    PCIe Generation
    PCIe 1.1
    PCIe 2.0+82%
    Max RAM Speed
    DDR-400
    β€”
    Max RAM Capacity
    4 GB
    β€”
    RAM Channels
    2
    β€”
    ECC Support
    No
    β€”
    PCIe Lanes
    0
    β€”