Athlon II X4 640 vs Core i3-3220

AMD

Athlon II X4 640

4 Cores4 Thrd95 WWMax: 3 GHz2010
Similar parts
·······
VS
Intel

Core i3-3220

2 Cores4 Thrd0 WWMax: 3.3 GHz2012
Similar parts
·······

Athlon II X4 640 vs Core i3-3220 Performance Spectrum

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 X4 640 vs Core i3-3220 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 X4 640 vs Core i3-3220: 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 X4 640

2010

Why buy it

  • Costs $37 less on MSRP ($80 MSRP vs $117 MSRP).
  • Delivers 45.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 28.3 vs 19.5 PassMark/$ ($80 MSRP vs $117 MSRP).

Trade-offs

  • Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (386 vs 503).
  • Lower PassMark (2,266 vs 2,276).
  • No integrated graphics, while Core i3-3220 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i3-3220

2012

Why buy it

  • +30.3% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
  • Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 2500, while Athlon II X4 640 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

  • Lower PassMark per dollar, at 19.5 vs 28.3 PassMark/$ ($117 MSRP vs $80 MSRP).

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-3220 better than Athlon II X4 640?
Yes. Core i3-3220 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.3% average FPS lead across 46 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.4% 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 i3-3220 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.3% more average FPS across 46 shared CPU game tests.
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-3220 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Core i3-3220 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Core i3-3220 comes in 46.3% more expensive on MSRP at $117 MSRP versus $80 MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.3% average FPS lead across 46 shared CPU game tests in our data. Athlon II X4 640 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2010 platform. Even with 45.6% better value on paper (28.3 vs 19.5 PassMark/$), 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?
Core i3-3220 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2010) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 4 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Athlon II X4 640 vs Core i3-3220 Technical Specifications

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

AMD

Athlon II X4 640

The Athlon II X4 640 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 11 May 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Propus (2009−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,266 points. Launch price was $80.

Intel

Core i3-3220

The Core i3-3220 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 September 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.3 GHz, with boost up to 3.3 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,276 points. Launch price was $117.

Processing Power

The Athlon II X4 640 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core i3-3220 offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the Athlon II X4 640 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3 GHz on the Athlon II X4 640 versus 3.3 GHz on the Core i3-3220 — a 9.5% clock advantage for the Core i3-3220 (base: 3 GHz vs 3.3 GHz). The Athlon II X4 640 uses the Propus (2009−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Core i3-3220 uses Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) (22 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X4 640 scores 2,266 against the Core i3-3220's 2,276 — a 0.4% lead for the Core i3-3220. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 386 vs 503, a 26.3% lead for the Core i3-3220 that directly translates to higher frame rates. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon II X4 640 vs 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-3220.

FeatureAthlon II X4 640Core i3-3220
Cores / Threads
4 / 4+100%
2 / 4
Boost Clock
3 GHz
3.3 GHz+10%
Base Clock
3 GHz
3.3 GHz+10%
L3 Cache
0 kB
3 MB (total)
L2 Cache
512 kB (per core)+100%
256 kB (per core)
Process
45 nm
22 nm-51%
Architecture
Propus (2009−2011)
Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
PassMark
2,266
2,276
Cinebench R23 Multi
1,471
Geekbench 6 Single
386
503+30%
Geekbench 6 Multi
1,332
🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon II X4 640 uses the AM3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i3-3220 uses LGA1155 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the Athlon II X4 640 versus DDR3-1600 on the Core i3-3220 — the Core i3-3220 supports 20% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i3-3220 supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: AM2+,AM3 (Athlon II X4 640) and B75,Z75,Z77,H77,Q75,Q77,H61,H67,P67,Z68 (Core i3-3220).

FeatureAthlon II X4 640Core i3-3220
Socket
AM3
LGA1155
PCIe Generation
PCIe 2.0
PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed
DDR3-1333
DDR3-1600+20%
Max RAM Capacity
16 GB
32 GB+100%
RAM Channels
2
2
ECC Support
No
No
PCIe Lanes
16
16
🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (Athlon II X4 640) vs VT-x, EPT (Core i3-3220). The Core i3-3220 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 2500), while the Athlon II X4 640 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Athlon II X4 640 targets Budget, Core i3-3220 targets Budget Desktop. Direct competitor: Athlon II X4 640 rivals Core 2 Quad Q8300; Core i3-3220 rivals FX-4300.

FeatureAthlon II X4 640Core i3-3220
Integrated GPU
No
Yes
IGPU Model
HD Graphics 2500
Unlocked
No
No
AVX-512
No
No
Virtualization
AMD-V
VT-x, EPT
Target Use
Budget
Budget Desktop
💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Athlon II X4 640 was priced at $80, while the Core i3-3220 came in at $117. On launch pricing ($80 vs $117), Athlon II X4 640 was $37 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon II X4 640 delivers 28.3 pts/$ vs 19.5 pts/$ for the Core i3-3220 — making the Athlon II X4 640 the 37.1% better value option.

FeatureAthlon II X4 640Core i3-3220
MSRP
$80-32%
$117
Performance per Dollar
28.3+45%
19.5
Release Date
2010
2012

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.