Athlon 64 3400+
Opteron 148
Athlon 64 3400+ vs Opteron 148 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 3400+ vs Opteron 148 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 3400+ vs Opteron 148: 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 3400+
2001Why buy it
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (545 vs 548).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $440 MSRP, while Opteron 148 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
Opteron 148
2005Why buy it
- ✅+0.6% higher PassMark.
- ✅Draws 85W instead of 89W, a 4W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.
Quick Answers
So, is Opteron 148 better than Athlon 64 3400+?
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 3400+ vs Opteron 148 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
Athlon 64 3400+
The Athlon 64 3400+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Clawhammer (2001−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.4 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: 545 points. Launch price was $149.
Opteron 148
The Opteron 148 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. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: 939. Thermal design power (TDP): 85 Watt. Memory support: DDR1. Passmark benchmark score: 548 points. Launch price was $800.
Processing Power
Both the Athlon 64 3400+ and Opteron 148 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the Athlon 64 3400+ versus 2.2 GHz on the Opteron 148 — a 8.7% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 3400+. The Athlon 64 3400+ uses the Clawhammer (2001−2005) architecture (130 nm), while the Opteron 148 uses SledgeHammer (2003−2005) (130 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 3400+ scores 545 against the Opteron 148's 548 — a 0.5% lead for the Opteron 148. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Athlon 64 3400+ | Opteron 148 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 2.4 GHz+9% | 2.2 GHz |
| Base Clock | — | 2.2 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 | 545 | 548 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon 64 3400+ uses the 754 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Opteron 148 uses 939 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Athlon 64 3400+ | Opteron 148 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | 754 | 939 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR-400 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 1 | — |
| ECC Support | No | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | — |
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 3400+ and Opteron 148
