Athlon 64 X2 5200+ vs Core i3-380UM

Athlon 64 X2 5200+ vs Core i3-380UM Performance Spectrum

Athlon 64 X2 5200+

2 / 2

1,505

+0.2%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i3-380UM

2 / 4

1,502

0.0%

Pentium U5600

Celeron 1019Y

Core i3-370M

Pentium Dual Core T4500

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 5200+ vs Core i3-380UM 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 5200+ vs Core i3-380UM: 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 5200+

2006

Why buy it

✅Draws 89W instead of 512W, a 423W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $420 MSRP, while Core i3-380UM mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core i3-380UM can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i3-380UM

2010

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics, while Athlon 64 X2 5200+ needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,502 vs 1,505).
❌475.3% higher power demand at 512W vs 89W.

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon 64 X2 5200+ better than Core i3-380UM?

Yes. Athlon 64 X2 5200+ is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.2% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Athlon 64 X2 5200+ is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.4% 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, Athlon 64 X2 5200+ is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Athlon 64 X2 5200+ is the better buy right now. Athlon 64 X2 5200+ comes in at an unclear MSRP at $420 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.4% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (3.6 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Core i3-380UM makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2010 vs 2006). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Athlon 64 X2 5200+ vs Core i3-380UM Technical Specifications

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

Athlon 64 X2 5200+

The Athlon 64 X2 5200+ 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: 2.7 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: 1,505 points. Launch price was $149.

Core i3-380UM

The Core i3-380UM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 October 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.33 GHz, with boost up to 0.03 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1288. Thermal design power (TDP): 18 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,502 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Athlon 64 X2 5200+ packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i3-380UM's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.7 GHz on the Athlon 64 X2 5200+ versus 0.03 GHz on the Core i3-380UM — a 195.6% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 X2 5200+. The Athlon 64 X2 5200+ uses the Windsor (2006−2007) architecture (90 nm), while the Core i3-380UM uses Arrandale (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 X2 5200+ scores 1,505 against the Core i3-380UM's 1,502 — a 0.2% lead for the Athlon 64 X2 5200+. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon 64 X2 5200+ vs 3 MB on the Core i3-380UM.

Feature	Athlon 64 X2 5200+	Core i3-380UM
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.7 GHz+8900%	0.03 GHz
Base Clock	—	1.33 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	3 MB
L2 Cache	512K	512 kB
Process	90 nm	32 nm-64%
Architecture	Windsor (2006−2007)	Arrandale (2010−2011)
PassMark	1,505	1,502
Geekbench 6 Single	—	199
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	451

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon 64 X2 5200+ uses the AM2 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Core i3-380UM uses BGA1288 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR2-800 memory speed. The Athlon 64 X2 5200+ supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon 64 X2 5200+) vs 16 (Core i3-380UM) — the Core i3-380UM offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD AM2 (Athlon 64 X2 5200+) and HM55,HM57,QM57 (Core i3-380UM).

Feature	Athlon 64 X2 5200+	Core i3-380UM
Socket	AM2	BGA1288
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 2.0+82%
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-800	DDR3-800
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+100%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Athlon 64 X2 5200+) / No (Core i3-380UM). The Core i3-380UM includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics), while the Athlon 64 X2 5200+ requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-380UM targets Budget. Direct competitor: Core i3-380UM rivals Athlon Silver 3050U.