
Core i3-350M vs Athlon II X2 250

Core i3-350M

Athlon II X2 250
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 Core i3-350M is positioned at rank 17 and the Athlon II X2 250 is on rank 955, so the Core i3-350M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Core i3-350M
Performance Per Dollar Athlon II X2 250
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Core i3-350M | Athlon II X2 250 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($10) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Arrandale (2010−2011) / 32 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Regor (2009−2013) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Core i3-350M | Athlon II X2 250 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+51%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($10) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($15) |
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 Core i3-350M and Athlon II X2 250

Core i3-350M
The Core i3-350M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 7 January 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.26 GHz, with boost up to 0.27 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,088 points. Launch price was $130.

Athlon II X2 250
The Athlon II X2 250 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2 June 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Regor (2009−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,080 points. Launch price was $39.
Processing Power
The Core i3-350M packs 2 cores / 4 threads, matching the Athlon II X2 250's 2 cores. Boost clocks reach 0.27 GHz on the Core i3-350M versus 3 GHz on the Athlon II X2 250 — a 167% clock advantage for the Athlon II X2 250 (base: 2.26 GHz vs 3 GHz). The Core i3-350M uses the Arrandale (2010−2011) architecture (32 nm), while the Athlon II X2 250 uses Regor (2009−2013) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-350M scores 1,088 against the Athlon II X2 250's 1,080 — a 0.7% lead for the Core i3-350M. L3 cache: 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-350M vs 0 kB on the Athlon II X2 250.
| Feature | Core i3-350M | Athlon II X2 250 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 4 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 0.27 GHz | 3 GHz+1011% |
| Base Clock | 2.26 GHz | 3 GHz+33% |
| L3 Cache | 3 MB (total) | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 2 MB+700% |
| Process | 32 nm-29% | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Arrandale (2010−2011) | Regor (2009−2013) |
| PassMark | 1,088 | 1,080 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 280 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 650 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Core i3-350M uses the PGA988 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Athlon II X2 250 uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1066 on the Core i3-350M versus 1333 on the Athlon II X2 250 — the Athlon II X2 250 supports 199.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon II X2 250 supports up to 16 of RAM compared to 8 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i3-350M) vs 0 (Athlon II X2 250) — the Core i3-350M offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: HM55,HM57 (Core i3-350M) and AM2+,AM3 (Athlon II X2 250).
| Feature | Core i3-350M | Athlon II X2 250 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | PGA988 | AM3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1066 | 1333+44333% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 GB+52428700% | 16 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i3-350M) vs true (Athlon II X2 250). The Core i3-350M includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics), while the Athlon II X2 250 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-350M targets Entry Laptop. Direct competitor: Core i3-350M rivals AMD Athlon II P320; Athlon II X2 250 rivals Pentium E5700.
| Feature | Core i3-350M | Athlon II X2 250 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | Intel HD Graphics | None |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d, EPT | true |
| Target Use | Entry Laptop | — |
Value Analysis
The Core i3-350M launched at $130 MSRP, while the Athlon II X2 250 debuted at $87. At current prices ($10 vs $15), the Core i3-350M is $5 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i3-350M delivers 108.8 pts/$ vs 72.0 pts/$ for the Athlon II X2 250 — making the Core i3-350M the 40.7% better value option.
| Feature | Core i3-350M | Athlon II X2 250 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $130 | $87-33% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $10-33% | $15 |
| Performance per Dollar | 108.8+51% | 72.0 |
| Release Date | 2010 | 2009 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
















