Athlon 64 3100+ vs Turion 64 MT-32

Athlon 64 3100+ vs Turion 64 MT-32 Performance Spectrum

Athlon 64 3100+

1 / 1

475

0.0%

Athlon XP 2100+

Athlon XP 2400+

Athlon XP 2700+

Mobile Athlon 64 2800+

Ryzen 5 8640HS

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Turion 64 MT-32

1 / 1

505

+6.3%

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.

Athlon 64 3100+ vs Turion 64 MT-32 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 3100+ vs Turion 64 MT-32: 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 3100+

2008

Why buy it

✅Draws 25W instead of 512W, a 487W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Turion 64 MT-32 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (475 vs 505).
❌Launch MSRP is still $100 MSRP, while Turion 64 MT-32 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Turion 64 MT-32

2005

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +8.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌1948% higher power demand at 512W vs 25W.

Quick Answers

So, is Turion 64 MT-32 better than Athlon 64 3100+?

Yes. Turion 64 MT-32 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 8.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 6.3% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Turion 64 MT-32 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 8.0% 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-32 is the stronger fit. You are getting 6.3% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

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

Turion 64 MT-32 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Turion 64 MT-32 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $100 MSRP, and it still gives you a 8.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Athlon 64 3100+ only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2008 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (4.8 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on AM2.

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

Athlon 64 3100+ makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2008 vs 2005). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Athlon 64 3100+ vs Turion 64 MT-32 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon 64 3100+

The Athlon 64 3100+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Lima (2008−2009) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2 GHz. L2 cache: 512K. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: AM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 25 Watt. Memory support: DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 475 points. Launch price was $149.

Turion 64 MT-32

The Turion 64 MT-32 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Lancaster (2005−2006) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.79 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: 754. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB. Passmark benchmark score: 505 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon 64 3100+ and Turion 64 MT-32 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Athlon 64 3100+ versus 1.79 GHz on the Turion 64 MT-32 — a 11.1% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 3100+. The Athlon 64 3100+ uses the Lima (2008−2009) architecture (65 nm), while the Turion 64 MT-32 uses Lancaster (2005−2006) (90 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 3100+ scores 475 against the Turion 64 MT-32's 505 — a 6.1% lead for the Turion 64 MT-32.

Feature	Athlon 64 3100+	Turion 64 MT-32
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	1 / 1
Boost Clock	2 GHz+12%	1.79 GHz
L3 Cache	—	0 kB
L2 Cache	512K	512 kB
Process	65 nm-28%	90 nm
Architecture	Lima (2008−2009)	Lancaster (2005−2006)
PassMark	475	505+6%
Geekbench 6 Single	280	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	280	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon 64 3100+ uses the AM2 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Turion 64 MT-32 uses 754 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Athlon 64 3100+	Turion 64 MT-32
Socket	AM2	754
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-800	—
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (Athlon 64 3100+) / not specified (Turion 64 MT-32). Primary use case: Athlon 64 3100+ targets Legacy Desktop. Direct competitor: Athlon 64 3100+ rivals Celeron D 352.