Athlon II M320 vs Core i3-4000M

Athlon II M320 vs Core i3-4000M Performance Spectrum

Athlon II M320

2 / 2

1,795

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i3-4000M

2 / 4

1,797

+0.1%

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 II M320 vs Core i3-4000M 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 II M320 vs Core i3-4000M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Athlon II M320

2009

Why buy it

✅Draws 1W instead of 512W, a 511W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,795 vs 1,797).
❌Launch MSRP is still $75 MSRP, while Core i3-4000M mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Core i3-4000M

2013

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌51100% higher power demand at 512W vs 1W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-4000M better than Athlon II M320?

Yes. Core i3-4000M is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 1.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.1% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i3-4000M is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.1% 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, Core i3-4000M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core i3-4000M is still the much better call for a fresh build. Core i3-4000M comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $75 MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Athlon II M320 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2009 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (23.9 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on S1g3.

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

Core i3-4000M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2009) and more multi-core headroom with 2 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 II M320 vs Core i3-4000M Technical Specifications

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

Athlon II M320

The Athlon II M320 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Caspian (2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2.1 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: S1g3. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 1,795 points. Launch price was $149.

Core i3-4000M

The Core i3-4000M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: PGA946. Thermal design power (TDP): 37 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,797 points. Launch price was $225.

⚡

Processing Power

The Athlon II M320 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, matching the Core i3-4000M's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 2.1 GHz on the Athlon II M320 versus 2.4 GHz on the Core i3-4000M — a 13.3% clock advantage for the Core i3-4000M. The Athlon II M320 uses the Caspian (2009) architecture (45 nm), while the Core i3-4000M uses Haswell (2013−2015) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II M320 scores 1,795 against the Core i3-4000M's 1,797 — a 0.1% lead for the Core i3-4000M.

Feature	Athlon II M320	Core i3-4000M
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 4
Boost Clock	2.1 GHz	2.4 GHz+14%
Base Clock	—	2.4 GHz
L3 Cache	—	3 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB	256K (per core)+25500%
Process	45 nm	22 nm-51%
Architecture	Caspian (2009)	Haswell (2013−2015)
PassMark	1,795	1,797
Geekbench 6 Single	188	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	1,955	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon II M320 uses the S1g3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i3-4000M uses PGA946 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Athlon II M320	Core i3-4000M
Socket	S1g3	PGA946
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-800	—
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	0	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (Athlon II M320) / not specified (Core i3-4000M). Primary use case: Athlon II M320 targets Legacy Laptop. Direct competitor: Athlon II M320 rivals Core 2 Duo T6400.