Athlon II Neo K125 vs Core i3-380UM
Athlon II Neo K125
Core i3-380UM
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 II Neo K125 is positioned at rank 982 and the Core i3-380UM is on rank 225, so the Core i3-380UM offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Athlon II Neo K125
Performance Per Dollar Core i3-380UM
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon II Neo K125 | Core i3-380UM |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($100) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Geneva (2010) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Arrandale (2010−2011) / 32 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon II Neo K125 | Core i3-380UM |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($100) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
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 II Neo K125 and Core i3-380UM
Athlon II Neo K125
The Athlon II Neo K125 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Geneva (2010) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.7 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: 1,491 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 II Neo K125 packs 1 cores / 1 threads, while the Core i3-380UM offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the Core i3-380UM has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 1.7 GHz on the Athlon II Neo K125 versus 0.03 GHz on the Core i3-380UM — a 193.1% clock advantage for the Athlon II Neo K125. The Athlon II Neo K125 uses the Geneva (2010) architecture (45 nm), while the Core i3-380UM uses Arrandale (2010−2011) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II Neo K125 scores 1,491 against the Core i3-380UM's 1,502 — a 0.7% lead for the Core i3-380UM.
| Feature | Athlon II Neo K125 | Core i3-380UM |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 2 / 4+100% |
| Boost Clock | 1.7 GHz+5567% | 0.03 GHz |
| Base Clock | — | 1.33 GHz |
| L3 Cache | — | 3 MB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+100% | 512 kB |
| Process | 45 nm | 32 nm-29% |
| Architecture | Geneva (2010) | Arrandale (2010−2011) |
| PassMark | 1,491 | 1,502 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 199 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 451 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon II Neo K125 uses the S1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i3-380UM uses BGA1288 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-800 memory speed. The Core i3-380UM supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon II Neo K125) vs 16 (Core i3-380UM) — the Core i3-380UM offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD ASB2 (Athlon II Neo K125) and HM55,HM57,QM57 (Core i3-380UM).
| Feature | Athlon II Neo K125 | Core i3-380UM |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | S1 | BGA1288 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-800 | DDR3-800 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB | 8 GB+100% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Athlon II Neo K125) / No (Core i3-380UM). The Core i3-380UM includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics), while the Athlon II Neo K125 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-380UM targets Budget. Direct competitor: Core i3-380UM rivals Athlon Silver 3050U.
| Feature | Athlon II Neo K125 | Core i3-380UM |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | Yes |
| IGPU Model | — | Intel HD Graphics |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | No |
| Target Use | — | Budget |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Athlon II Neo K125 and Core i3-380UM
