Athlon II X2 250u vs E2-3000

Athlon II X2 250u vs E2-3000 Performance Spectrum

Athlon II X2 250u

2 / 2

935

0.0%

Athlon 64 3300+

Mobile Athlon 64 3700+

Athlon 64 FX-57

Athlon 64 X2 TK-42

Ryzen 5 5600F

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

E2-3000

2 / 2

990

+5.9%

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 250u vs E2-3000 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 250u vs E2-3000: 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 250u

2009

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than E2-3000 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (935 vs 990).
❌Launch MSRP is still $60 MSRP, while E2-3000 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌66.7% higher power demand at 25W vs 15W.

E2-3000

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +8.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 15W instead of 25W, a 10W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is E2-3000 better than Athlon II X2 250u?

Yes. E2-3000 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 8.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 5.9% 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, E2-3000 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 8.6% 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, E2-3000 is the stronger fit. You are getting 5.9% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

E2-3000 is still the much better call for a fresh build. E2-3000 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $60 MSRP, and it still gives you a 8.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Athlon II X2 250u only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2009 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (15.6 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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?

E2-3000 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 / 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 250u vs E2-3000 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon II X2 250u

The Athlon II X2 250u is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 20 October 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Regor (2009−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 25 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 935 points. Launch price was $35.

E2-3000

The E2-3000 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Kabini (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.65 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1024 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 990 points. Launch price was $50.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon II X2 250u and E2-3000 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.6 GHz on the Athlon II X2 250u versus 1.65 GHz on the E2-3000 — a 3.1% clock advantage for the E2-3000. The Athlon II X2 250u uses the Regor (2009−2013) architecture (45 nm), while the E2-3000 uses Kabini (2013−2014) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X2 250u scores 935 against the E2-3000's 990 — a 5.7% lead for the E2-3000. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Athlon II X2 250u	E2-3000
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.6 GHz	1.65 GHz+3%
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB	1024 kB
Process	45 nm	28 nm-38%
Architecture	Regor (2009−2013)	Kabini (2013−2014)
PassMark	935	990+6%
Geekbench 6 Single	222	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	423	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon II X2 250u uses the AM3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the E2-3000 uses FT3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Athlon II X2 250u	E2-3000
Socket	AM3	FT3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1066	—
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (Athlon II X2 250u) / not specified (E2-3000). Primary use case: Athlon II X2 250u targets Low Power Desktop. Direct competitor: Athlon II X2 250u rivals Core 2 Duo E7500.