Athlon 64 3500+ vs Atom E3826

Athlon 64 3500+ vs Atom E3826 Performance Spectrum

Athlon 64 3500+

1 / 1

570

+4.6%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Atom E3826

2 / 2

545

0.0%

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 3500+ vs Atom E3826 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 3500+ vs Atom E3826: 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 3500+

2001

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $272 MSRP, while Atom E3826 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌1171.4% higher power demand at 89W vs 7W.
❌No integrated graphics, while Atom E3826 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Atom E3826

2013

Why buy it

✅Draws 7W instead of 89W, a 82W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail), while Athlon 64 3500+ needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (545 vs 570).

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon 64 3500+ better than Atom E3826?

Yes. Athlon 64 3500+ is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 4.6% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Athlon 64 3500+ is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.1% 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, Athlon 64 3500+ is the stronger fit. You are getting 4.6% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.

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

Athlon 64 3500+ is the better buy right now. Athlon 64 3500+ comes in at an unclear MSRP at $272 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (2.1 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Atom E3826 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2001). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Athlon 64 3500+ vs Atom E3826 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon 64 3500+

The Athlon 64 3500+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Janeiro 2001 (24 years ago). It is based on the San Diego (2001−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: 939. Thermal design power (TDP): 89 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 570 points. Launch price was $59.

Atom E3826

The Atom E3826 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 October 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-I (2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.47 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 7 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 545 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Athlon 64 3500+ packs 1 cores / 1 threads, while the Atom E3826 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Atom E3826 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 2.2 GHz on the Athlon 64 3500+ versus 1.47 GHz on the Atom E3826 — a 39.8% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 3500+. The Athlon 64 3500+ uses the San Diego (2001−2005) architecture (130 nm), while the Atom E3826 uses Bay Trail-I (2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 3500+ scores 570 against the Atom E3826's 545 — a 4.5% lead for the Athlon 64 3500+. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Athlon 64 3500+	Atom E3826
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	2 / 2+100%
Boost Clock	2.2 GHz+50%	1.47 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512 kB	512 kB (per core)
Process	130 nm	22 nm-83%
Architecture	San Diego (2001−2005)	Bay Trail-I (2013)
PassMark	570+5%	545

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon 64 3500+ uses the 939 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Atom E3826 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR-400 on the Athlon 64 3500+ versus DDR3L-1066 on the Atom E3826 — the Atom E3826 supports -366.5% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Atom E3826 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. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon 64 3500+) vs 4 (Atom E3826) — the Atom E3826 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD 939 (Athlon 64 3500+) and Intel FCBGA1170 (Atom E3826).

Feature	Athlon 64 3500+	Atom E3826
Socket	939	FCBGA1170
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 2.0+82%
Max RAM Speed	DDR-400	DDR3L-1066
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	8 GB+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	0	4