Athlon II X2 220 vs E2-3200

Athlon II X2 220 vs E2-3200 Performance Spectrum

Athlon II X2 220

2 / 2

1,046

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

E2-3200

2 / 2

1,050

+0.4%

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 II X2 220 vs E2-3200 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 X2 220 vs E2-3200: 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 X2 220

2010

Why buy it

✅Includes a boxed cooler (true), unlike E2-3200.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,046 vs 1,050).
❌Launch MSRP is still $32 MSRP, while E2-3200 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

E2-3200

2011

Why buy it

✅+0.4% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Athlon II X2 220.

Quick Answers

So, is E2-3200 better than Athlon II X2 220?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Athlon II X2 220 is ahead with a 0.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, E2-3200 pulls ahead with 0.4% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, E2-3200 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

E2-3200 is still the much better call for a fresh build. E2-3200 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $32 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.4% better PassMark. Athlon II X2 220 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2010 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (32.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on AM3.

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

E2-3200 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2010) 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 II X2 220 vs E2-3200 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon II X2 220

The Athlon II X2 220 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 21 September 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Regor (2009−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,046 points. Launch price was $32.

E2-3200

The E2-3200 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Llano (2011−2012) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.4 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM1. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,050 points. Launch price was $50.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon II X2 220 and E2-3200 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the Athlon II X2 220 versus 2.4 GHz on the E2-3200 — a 15.4% clock advantage for the Athlon II X2 220 (base: 2.8 GHz vs 2.4 GHz). The Athlon II X2 220 uses the Regor (2009−2013) architecture (45 nm), while the E2-3200 uses Llano (2011−2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X2 220 scores 1,046 against the E2-3200's 1,050 — a 0.4% lead for the E2-3200. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Athlon II X2 220	E2-3200
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.8 GHz+17%	2.4 GHz
Base Clock	2.8 GHz+17%	2.4 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	512 kB	512 kB (per core)
Process	45 nm	32 nm-29%
Architecture	Regor (2009−2013)	Llano (2011−2012)
PassMark	1,046	1,050
Geekbench 6 Single	285	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	500	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon II X2 220 uses the AM3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the E2-3200 uses FM1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.