Athlon 64 X2 3600+ vs Atom x5-Z8330

Athlon 64 X2 3600+ vs Atom x5-Z8330 Performance Spectrum

Athlon 64 X2 3600+

2 / 2

1,020

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Atom x5-Z8330

4 / 4

1,025

+0.5%

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 X2 3600+ vs Atom x5-Z8330 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 X2 3600+ vs Atom x5-Z8330: 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 X2 3600+

2005

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,020 vs 1,025).
❌Launch MSRP is still $150 MSRP, while Atom x5-Z8330 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while Atom x5-Z8330 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Atom x5-Z8330

2016

Why buy it

✅+0.5% higher PassMark.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Cherry Trail), while Athlon 64 X2 3600+ needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

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

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon 64 X2 3600+ better than Atom x5-Z8330?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Athlon 64 X2 3600+ is ahead with a 0.2% average FPS lead across 49 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Atom x5-Z8330 pulls ahead with 0.5% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Atom x5-Z8330 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.5% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

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

Athlon 64 X2 3600+ is the better buy right now. Athlon 64 X2 3600+ comes in at an unclear MSRP at $150 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.2% average FPS lead across 49 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Atom x5-Z8330 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.5% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (6.8 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 x5-Z8330 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2005) and more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Athlon 64 X2 3600+ vs Atom x5-Z8330 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon 64 X2 3600+

The Athlon 64 X2 3600+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Manchester (2005−2006) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: 939. Thermal design power (TDP): 89 Watt. Memory support: DDR1. Passmark benchmark score: 1,020 points. Launch price was $149.

Atom x5-Z8330

The Atom x5-Z8330 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 February 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Airmont (2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.44 GHz, with boost up to 1.92 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Memory support: DDR3L-RS 1600. Passmark benchmark score: 1,025 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Athlon 64 X2 3600+ packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Atom x5-Z8330 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Atom x5-Z8330 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Athlon 64 X2 3600+ versus 1.92 GHz on the Atom x5-Z8330 — a 4.1% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 X2 3600+. The Athlon 64 X2 3600+ uses the Manchester (2005−2006) architecture (90 nm), while the Atom x5-Z8330 uses Airmont (2016) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 X2 3600+ scores 1,020 against the Atom x5-Z8330's 1,025 — a 0.5% lead for the Atom x5-Z8330. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Athlon 64 X2 3600+	Atom x5-Z8330
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	2 GHz+4%	1.92 GHz
Base Clock	—	1.44 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	2 MB+700%
Process	90 nm	14 nm-84%
Architecture	Manchester (2005−2006)	Airmont (2016)
PassMark	1,020	1,025

🧠

Memory & Platform

Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-800 on the Athlon 64 X2 3600+ versus DDR3L-RS 1600 on the Atom x5-Z8330 — the Atom x5-Z8330 supports 100% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon 64 X2 3600+ supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 2 GB — 700% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Athlon 64 X2 3600+) vs 1 (Atom x5-Z8330). PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon 64 X2 3600+) vs 1 (Atom x5-Z8330) — the Atom x5-Z8330 offers 1 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD AM2 (Athlon 64 X2 3600+) and Intel FC-UTBGA592 (Atom x5-Z8330).

Feature	Athlon 64 X2 3600+	Atom x5-Z8330
Socket	939	—
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 3.0+173%
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-800	DDR3L-RS 1600+100%
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+700%	2 GB
RAM Channels	2+100%	1
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	1