Athlon 64 X2 4000+ vs E-300

Athlon 64 X2 4000+ vs E-300 Performance Spectrum

Athlon 64 X2 4000+

2 / 2

1,175

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

E-300

2 / 2

1,176

+0.1%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen 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 X2 4000+ vs E-300 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 4000+ vs E-300: 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 4000+

2006

Why buy it

✅Includes a boxed cooler (Stock Cooler), unlike E-300.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,175 vs 1,176).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 3.6 vs 19.6 PassMark/$ ($328 MSRP vs $60 MSRP).
❌394.4% higher power demand at 89W vs 18W.
❌No integrated graphics, while E-300 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

E-300

2011

Why buy it

✅+0.1% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $268 less on MSRP ($60 MSRP vs $328 MSRP).
✅Delivers 447.1% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 19.6 vs 3.6 PassMark/$ ($60 MSRP vs $328 MSRP).
✅Draws 18W instead of 89W, a 71W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 6310, while Athlon 64 X2 4000+ needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Athlon 64 X2 4000+.

Quick Answers

So, is E-300 better than Athlon 64 X2 4000+?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Athlon 64 X2 4000+ is ahead with a 0.2% average FPS lead across 47 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, E-300 pulls ahead with 0.1% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, E-300 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

E-300 is the better buy right now. E-300 comes in $268 cheaper on MSRP at $60 MSRP versus $328 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.1% better PassMark. The compromise is that Athlon 64 X2 4000+ is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 0.2% average FPS lead across 47 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 447.1% better value on MSRP (19.6 vs 3.6 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

E-300 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2006) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 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 4000+ vs E-300 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon 64 X2 4000+

The Athlon 64 X2 4000+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Windsor (2006−2007) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: AM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 89 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,175 points. Launch price was $149.

E-300

The E-300 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 22 August 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Zacate (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.3 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 40 nm process technology. Socket: FT1. Thermal design power (TDP): 18 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,176 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon 64 X2 4000+ and E-300 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Athlon 64 X2 4000+ versus 1.3 GHz on the E-300 — a 42.4% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 X2 4000+. The Athlon 64 X2 4000+ uses the Windsor (2006−2007) architecture (90 nm), while the E-300 uses Zacate (2011−2013) (40 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 X2 4000+ scores 1,175 against the E-300's 1,176 — a 0.1% lead for the E-300. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Athlon 64 X2 4000+	E-300
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2 GHz+54%	1.3 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512K	512K (per core)
Process	90 nm	40 nm-56%
Architecture	Windsor (2006−2007)	Zacate (2011−2013)
PassMark	1,175	1,176
Geekbench 6 Single	195	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	380	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon 64 X2 4000+ uses the AM2 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the E-300 uses FT1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-800 on the Athlon 64 X2 4000+ versus DDR3-1066 on the E-300 — the E-300 supports 33.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The E-300 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Athlon 64 X2 4000+) vs 1 (E-300). Both provide 0 PCIe lanes.

Feature	Athlon 64 X2 4000+	E-300
Socket	AM2	FT1
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 2.0+82%
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-800	DDR3-1066+33%
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	8 GB+100%
RAM Channels	2+100%	1
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support AMD-V virtualization. The E-300 includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 6310), while the Athlon 64 X2 4000+ requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Athlon 64 X2 4000+ targets Legacy Desktop, E-300 targets Budget Mobile.

Feature	Athlon 64 X2 4000+	E-300
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	None	Radeon HD 6310
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	AMD-V	AMD-V
Target Use	Legacy Desktop	Budget Mobile

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Athlon 64 X2 4000+ was priced at $328, while the E-300 came in at $60. On launch pricing ($328 vs $60), E-300 was $268 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon 64 X2 4000+ delivers 3.6 pts/$ vs 19.6 pts/$ for the E-300 — making the E-300 the 138.2% better value option.

Feature	Athlon 64 X2 4000+	E-300
MSRP	$328	$60-82%
Performance per Dollar	3.6	19.6+444%
Release Date	2006	2011

Search Athlon 64 X2 4000+ on Amazon

Search E-300 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.