Atom E3825 vs Athlon 64 3200+
Atom E3825
Athlon 64 3200+
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 Atom E3825 is positioned at rank 626 and the Athlon 64 3200+ is on rank 1118, so the Atom E3825 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Atom E3825
Performance Per Dollar Athlon 64 3200+
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Atom E3825 | Athlon 64 3200+ |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Bay Trail-I (2013) / 22 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Clawhammer (2001−2005) / 130 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Atom E3825 | Athlon 64 3200+ |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) |
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 Atom E3825 and Athlon 64 3200+
Atom E3825
The Atom E3825 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 October 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-I (2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.33 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 6 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 525 points. Launch price was $73.
Athlon 64 3200+
The Athlon 64 3200+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Janeiro 2001 (24 years ago). It is based on the Clawhammer (2001−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: 754. Thermal design power (TDP): 89 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 505 points. Launch price was $150.
Processing Power
The Atom E3825 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Athlon 64 3200+ offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the Atom E3825 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 1.33 GHz on the Atom E3825 versus 2 GHz on the Athlon 64 3200+ — a 40.2% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 3200+. The Atom E3825 uses the Bay Trail-I (2013) architecture (22 nm), while the Athlon 64 3200+ uses Clawhammer (2001−2005) (130 nm). In PassMark, the Atom E3825 scores 525 against the Athlon 64 3200+'s 505 — a 3.9% lead for the Atom E3825. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Atom E3825 | Athlon 64 3200+ |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2+100% | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 1.33 GHz | 2 GHz+50% |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB (per core) | 512K |
| Process | 22 nm-83% | 130 nm |
| Architecture | Bay Trail-I (2013) | Clawhammer (2001−2005) |
| PassMark | 525+4% | 505 |
Memory & Platform
The Atom E3825 uses the FCBGA1170 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Athlon 64 3200+ uses 754 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3L-1066 on the Atom E3825 versus DDR1-400 on the Athlon 64 3200+ — the Atom E3825 supports 100% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Atom E3825 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (Atom E3825) vs 2 (Athlon 64 3200+). PCIe lanes: 4 (Atom E3825) vs 16 (Athlon 64 3200+) — the Athlon 64 3200+ offers 12 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Intel FCBGA1170 (Atom E3825) and Socket 939,Socket 754 (Athlon 64 3200+).
| Feature | Atom E3825 | Athlon 64 3200+ |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA1170 | 754 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0+82% | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3L-1066+200% | DDR1-400 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 GB+100% | 4 GB |
| RAM Channels | 1 | 2+100% |
| ECC Support | ✅ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 4 | 16+300% |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Atom E3825) / false (Athlon 64 3200+). The Atom E3825 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail)), while the Athlon 64 3200+ requires a dedicated GPU.
| Feature | Atom E3825 | Athlon 64 3200+ |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) | — |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | false |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Atom E3825 and Athlon 64 3200+
