Chipversus Index
Jump to Section

Athlon 64 FX-51 vs Mobile Athlon 64 3700+

CPUCPUGPUGPU
AMD

Athlon 64 FX-51

1 Cores1 Thrd89 WWMax: 2.2 GHz2003
Similar parts
·······
Buy on Amazon
VS
AMD

Mobile Athlon 64 3700+

1 Cores1 Thrd1 WWMax: 2.4 GHz2005
Similar parts
·······
Buy on Amazon

Athlon 64 FX-51 vs Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ Performance Spectrum

Athlon 64 FX-51
1 / 1
615
0.0%
brand logoAthlon XP 2600+
brand logoAthlon XP 3000+
brand logoAthlon 64 3100+
brand logoAthlon 64 3400+
brand logoRyzen 7 PRO 6860Z
brand logoRyzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX
brand logoRyzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX
brand logoRyzen Threadripper 3990X
Mobile Athlon 64 3700+
1 / 1
622
+1.1%
brand logoAthlon XP 2600+
brand logoAthlon XP 3000+
brand logoAthlon 64 3100+
brand logoAthlon 64 3400+
brand logoRyzen 7 PRO 6860Z
brand logoRyzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX
brand logoRyzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX
brand logoRyzen 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 FX-51 vs Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ 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

Path of Exile 2

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-51
low15 FPS
medium15 FPS
high15 FPS
ultra15 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 3700+
low16 FPS
medium16 FPS
high16 FPS
ultra16 FPS
Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-51
low15 FPS
medium15 FPS
high15 FPS
ultra15 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 3700+
low16 FPS
medium16 FPS
high16 FPS
ultra16 FPS
League of Legends

League of Legends

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-51
low15 FPS
medium15 FPS
high15 FPS
ultra15 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 3700+
low16 FPS
medium16 FPS
high16 FPS
ultra16 FPS
Valorant

Valorant

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-51
low15 FPS
medium15 FPS
high15 FPS
ultra15 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 3700+
low16 FPS
medium16 FPS
high16 FPS
ultra16 FPS
Among Us

Among Us

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-51
low15 FPS
medium15 FPS
high15 FPS
ultra15 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 3700+
low16 FPS
medium16 FPS
high16 FPS
ultra16 FPS
Apex Legends

Apex Legends

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-51
low15 FPS
medium15 FPS
high15 FPS
ultra15 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 3700+
low16 FPS
medium16 FPS
high16 FPS
ultra16 FPS
ARC Raiders

ARC Raiders

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-51
low15 FPS
medium15 FPS
high15 FPS
ultra15 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 3700+
low16 FPS
medium16 FPS
high16 FPS
ultra16 FPS
Baldur's Gate 3

Baldur's Gate 3

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-51
low15 FPS
medium15 FPS
high15 FPS
ultra15 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 3700+
low16 FPS
medium16 FPS
high16 FPS
ultra16 FPS
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-51
low15 FPS
medium15 FPS
high15 FPS
ultra15 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 3700+
low16 FPS
medium16 FPS
high16 FPS
ultra16 FPS
Call of Duty: Warzone

Call of Duty: Warzone

1080P
Athlon 64 FX-51
low15 FPS
medium15 FPS
high15 FPS
ultra15 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 3700+
low16 FPS
medium16 FPS
high16 FPS
ultra16 FPS
Check FPS with Custom Builds

Athlon 64 FX-51 vs Mobile Athlon 64 3700+: 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 FX-51

2003

Why buy it

    Trade-offs

    • ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
    • ❌Lower PassMark (615 vs 622).
    • ❌Launch MSRP is still $733 MSRP, while Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
    • ❌8800% higher power demand at 89W vs 1W.

    Mobile Athlon 64 3700+

    2005

    Why buy it

    • ✅Better for gaming: +6.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
    • ✅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 Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ better than Athlon 64 FX-51?
    Yes. Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 6.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 1.1% 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, Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 6.7% 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, Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.
    Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
    Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ is still the much better call for a fresh build. Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $733 MSRP, and it still gives you a 6.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Athlon 64 FX-51 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2003 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (0.8 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on 940.
    Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
    Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2005 vs 2003) 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 FX-51 vs Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ Technical Specifications

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

    AMD

    Athlon 64 FX-51

    The Athlon 64 FX-51 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the SledgeHammer (2003−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: 940. Thermal design power (TDP): 89 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 615 points. Launch price was $149.

    AMD

    Mobile Athlon 64 3700+

    The Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Agosto 2005 (20 years ago). It is based on the Clawhammer (2001−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.4 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Socket: 754. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR1. Passmark benchmark score: 622 points. Launch price was $69.

    ⚡

    Processing Power

    Both the Athlon 64 FX-51 and Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.2 GHz on the Athlon 64 FX-51 versus 2.4 GHz on the Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ — a 8.7% clock advantage for the Mobile Athlon 64 3700+. The Athlon 64 FX-51 uses the SledgeHammer (2003−2005) architecture (130 nm), while the Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ uses Clawhammer (2001−2005). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 FX-51 scores 615 against the Mobile Athlon 64 3700+'s 622 — a 1.1% lead for the Mobile Athlon 64 3700+.

    FeatureAthlon 64 FX-51Mobile Athlon 64 3700+
    Cores / Threads
    1 / 1
    1 / 1
    Boost Clock
    2.2 GHz
    2.4 GHz+9%
    L3 Cache
    0 kB
    —
    L2 Cache
    1 MB
    1 MB
    Process
    130 nm
    —
    Architecture
    SledgeHammer (2003−2005)
    Clawhammer (2001−2005)
    PassMark
    615
    622+1%
    🧠

    Memory & Platform

    The Athlon 64 FX-51 uses the 940 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ uses 754 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR-400 on the Athlon 64 FX-51 versus 400 on the Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ — the Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ supports -200% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon 64 FX-51 supports up to 4 GB of RAM compared to 2 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Athlon 64 FX-51) vs 1 (Mobile Athlon 64 3700+). Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: AMD 940 (Athlon 64 FX-51) and 754 (Mobile Athlon 64 3700+).

    FeatureAthlon 64 FX-51Mobile Athlon 64 3700+
    Socket
    940
    754
    PCIe Generation
    PCIe 1.1
    PCIe 1.1
    Max RAM Speed
    DDR-400
    400
    Max RAM Capacity
    4 GB+100%
    2 GB
    RAM Channels
    2+100%
    1
    ECC Support
    Yes
    No
    PCIe Lanes
    0
    0
    🔧

    Advanced Features

    Virtualization: not specified (Athlon 64 FX-51) / false (Mobile Athlon 64 3700+). Direct competitor: Mobile Athlon 64 3700+ rivals Pentium M 735.

    FeatureAthlon 64 FX-51Mobile Athlon 64 3700+
    Integrated GPU
    No
    No
    IGPU Model
    —
    None
    Unlocked
    —
    No
    AVX-512
    —
    No
    Virtualization
    —
    false