Athlon II X3 415e vs Core 2 Solo SU3500

Athlon II X3 415e vs Core 2 Solo SU3500 Performance Spectrum

Athlon II X3 415e

3 / 3

1,481

+0.9%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core 2 Solo SU3500

1 / 1

1,468

0.0%

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 X3 415e vs Core 2 Solo SU3500 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 X3 415e vs Core 2 Solo SU3500: 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 X3 415e

2010

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $187 less on MSRP ($75 MSRP vs $262 MSRP).
✅Delivers 252.4% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 19.7 vs 5.6 PassMark/$ ($75 MSRP vs $262 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌1400% higher power demand at 45W vs 3W.

Core 2 Solo SU3500

2009

Why buy it

✅Draws 3W instead of 45W, a 42W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Athlon II X3 415e across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (1,468 vs 1,481).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 5.6 vs 19.7 PassMark/$ ($262 MSRP vs $75 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon II X3 415e better than Core 2 Solo SU3500?

Yes. Athlon II X3 415e is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 3.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.9% 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, Athlon II X3 415e is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.0% 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 II X3 415e is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.9% better PassMark, backed by 3 cores and 3 threads.

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

Athlon II X3 415e is the better buy right now. Athlon II X3 415e comes in $187 cheaper on MSRP at $75 MSRP versus $262 MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 252.4% better value on MSRP (19.7 vs 5.6 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Athlon II X3 415e makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2010 vs 2009) and more multi-core headroom with 3 cores / 3 threads instead of 1/1. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Athlon II X3 415e vs Core 2 Solo SU3500 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon II X3 415e

The Athlon II X3 415e is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 11 May 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Rana (2009−2011) architecture. It features 3 cores and 3 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,481 points. Launch price was $75.

Core 2 Solo SU3500

The Core 2 Solo SU3500 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 April 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Base frequency is 1.3 GHz, with boost up to 1.4 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 3 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: BGA956. Thermal design power (TDP): 5.5 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,468 points. Launch price was $262.

⚡

Processing Power

The Athlon II X3 415e packs 3 cores / 3 threads, while the Core 2 Solo SU3500 offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the Athlon II X3 415e has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the Athlon II X3 415e versus 1.4 GHz on the Core 2 Solo SU3500 — a 56.4% clock advantage for the Athlon II X3 415e (base: 2.5 GHz vs 1.3 GHz). The Athlon II X3 415e uses the Rana (2009−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Core 2 Solo SU3500 uses Penryn (2008−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X3 415e scores 1,481 against the Core 2 Solo SU3500's 1,468 — a 0.9% lead for the Athlon II X3 415e. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon II X3 415e vs 3 MB on the Core 2 Solo SU3500.

Feature	Athlon II X3 415e	Core 2 Solo SU3500
Cores / Threads	3 / 3+200%	1 / 1
Boost Clock	2.5 GHz+79%	1.4 GHz
Base Clock	2.5 GHz+92%	1.3 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	3 MB
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)	3 MB+500%
Process	45 nm	45 nm
Architecture	Rana (2009−2011)	Penryn (2008−2011)
PassMark	1,481	1,468

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon II X3 415e uses the AM3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core 2 Solo SU3500 uses BGA956 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Athlon II X3 415e	Core 2 Solo SU3500
Socket	AM3	BGA956
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0+82%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	—
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	0	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Athlon II X3 415e was priced at $75, while the Core 2 Solo SU3500 came in at $262. On launch pricing ($75 vs $262), Athlon II X3 415e was $187 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon II X3 415e delivers 19.7 pts/$ vs 5.6 pts/$ for the Core 2 Solo SU3500 — making the Athlon II X3 415e the 111.6% better value option.

Feature	Athlon II X3 415e	Core 2 Solo SU3500
MSRP	$75-71%	$262
Performance per Dollar	19.7+252%	5.6
Release Date	2010	2009

Search Athlon II X3 415e on Amazon

Search Core 2 Solo SU3500 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.