Athlon 64 X2 3800+ vs Core i7-620UM
Athlon 64 X2 3800+
Core i7-620UM
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 Core i7-620UM is on rank 1228, so the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 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 Core i7-620UM
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon 64 X2 3800+ | Core i7-620UM |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($20) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($278) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Manchester (2005−2006) / 90 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Arrandale (2010−2011) / 32 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon 64 X2 3800+ | Core i7-620UM |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+1295%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($20) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($278) |
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 Core i7-620UM
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.
Core i7-620UM
The Core i7-620UM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 7 January 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.06 GHz, with boost up to 2.13 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1288. Thermal design power (TDP): 18 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-800. Passmark benchmark score: 1,091 points. Launch price was $278.
Processing Power
The Athlon 64 X2 3800+ packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i7-620UM's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ versus 2.13 GHz on the Core i7-620UM — a 6.3% clock advantage for the Core i7-620UM. The Athlon 64 X2 3800+ uses the Manchester (2005−2006) architecture (90 nm), while the Core i7-620UM uses Arrandale (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ scores 1,095 against the Core i7-620UM's 1,091 — a 0.4% lead for the Athlon 64 X2 3800+. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ vs 4 MB (total) on the Core i7-620UM.
| Feature | Athlon 64 X2 3800+ | Core i7-620UM |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 4 |
| Boost Clock | 2 GHz | 2.13 GHz+6% |
| Base Clock | — | 1.06 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 4 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB+100% | 256 kB (per core) |
| Process | 90 nm | 32 nm-64% |
| Architecture | Manchester (2005−2006) | Arrandale (2010−2011) |
| PassMark | 1,095 | 1,091 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 350 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 700 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon 64 X2 3800+ uses the 939 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Core i7-620UM uses BGA1288 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-800 on the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ versus DDR3-1066 on the Core i7-620UM — the Core i7-620UM 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. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon 64 X2 3800+) vs 16 (Core i7-620UM) — the Core i7-620UM offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD AM2 (Athlon 64 X2 3800+) and HM55,QM57 (Core i7-620UM).
| Feature | Athlon 64 X2 3800+ | Core i7-620UM |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | 939 | BGA1288 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-800 | DDR3-1066+50% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB+100% | 8 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Athlon 64 X2 3800+) / VT-x (Core i7-620UM). The Core i7-620UM includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Ironlake)), while the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-620UM targets Ultra-Portable Laptop. Direct competitor: Core i7-620UM rivals Core 2 Duo SU9600.
| Feature | Athlon 64 X2 3800+ | Core i7-620UM |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Intel HD Graphics (Ironlake) |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | VT-x |
| Target Use | — | Ultra-Portable Laptop |
Value Analysis
The Athlon 64 X2 3800+ launched at $354 MSRP, while the Core i7-620UM debuted at $278.
| Feature | Athlon 64 X2 3800+ | Core i7-620UM |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $354 | $278-21% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20 | — |
| 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 Core i7-620UM
