CPU
GPU
Athlon 64 X2 3800+
Athlon II Neo K325
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Athlon 64 X2 3800+ is positioned at rank 1094 and the Athlon II Neo K325 is on rank 912, so the Athlon II Neo K325 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Athlon 64 X2 3800+
Performance Per Dollar Athlon II Neo K325
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon 64 X2 3800+ | Athlon II Neo K325 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($20) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($25) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Manchester (2005−2006) / 90 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Geneva (2010) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon 64 X2 3800+ | Athlon II Neo K325 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+23%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($20) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($25) |
Performance Check
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Athlon 64 X2 3800+ and Athlon II Neo K325
Athlon 64 X2 3800+
The Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 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: 512 kB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: 939. Thermal design power (TDP): 89 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,095 points. Launch price was $149.
Athlon II Neo K325
The Athlon II Neo K325 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Geneva (2010) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.3 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: S1. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,111 points. Launch price was $149.
Processing Power
Both the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ and Athlon II Neo K325 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ versus 1.3 GHz on the Athlon II Neo K325 — a 42.4% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 X2 3800+. The Athlon 64 X2 3800+ uses the Manchester (2005−2006) architecture (90 nm), while the Athlon II Neo K325 uses Geneva (2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ scores 1,095 against the Athlon II Neo K325's 1,111 — a 1.5% lead for the Athlon II Neo K325.
| Feature | Athlon 64 X2 3800+ | Athlon II Neo K325 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2 GHz+54% | 1.3 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | — |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB | 1 MB+100% |
| Process | 90 nm | 45 nm-50% |
| Architecture | Manchester (2005−2006) | Geneva (2010) |
| PassMark | 1,095 | 1,111+1% |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 736 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 1,235 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon 64 X2 3800+ uses the 939 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Athlon II Neo K325 uses S1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-800 on the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ versus DDR3-800 on the Athlon II Neo K325 — the Athlon II Neo K325 supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon 64 X2 3800+ supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: AMD AM2 (Athlon 64 X2 3800+) and M880G (Athlon II Neo K325).
| Feature | Athlon 64 X2 3800+ | Athlon II Neo K325 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | 939 | S1 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-800 | DDR3-800+50% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB+100% | 8 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Athlon 64 X2 3800+) / AMD-V (Athlon II Neo K325). Primary use case: Athlon II Neo K325 targets Low Power.
| Feature | Athlon 64 X2 3800+ | Athlon II Neo K325 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | AMD-V |
| Target Use | — | Low Power |
Value Analysis
The Athlon 64 X2 3800+ launched at $354 MSRP, while the Athlon II Neo K325 debuted at $60. At current prices ($20 vs $25), the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ is $5 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ delivers 54.8 pts/$ vs 44.4 pts/$ for the Athlon II Neo K325 — making the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ the 20.8% better value option.
| Feature | Athlon 64 X2 3800+ | Athlon II Neo K325 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $354 | $60-83% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20-20% | $25 |
| Performance per Dollar | 54.8+23% | 44.4 |
| Release Date | 2005 | 2010 |
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 X2 3800+ and Athlon II Neo K325
