Chipversus Index
Jump to Section

GX-210JA vs Mobile Athlon 64 2800+

CPUCPUGPUGPU
AMD

GX-210JA

2 Cores2 Thrd1 WWMax: 1 GHz2013
Buy on Amazon
VS
AMD

Mobile Athlon 64 2800+

1 Cores1 Thrd512 WWMax: 1.8 GHz2004
Buy on Amazon

GX-210JA vs Mobile Athlon 64 2800+ Performance Spectrum

GX-210JA
2 / 2
425
+1.2%
brand logoAthlon XP 1900+
brand logoAthlon XP 2200+
brand logoAthlon 64 2000+
brand logoAthlon XP 2700+
brand logoRyzen AI 5 340
brand logoRyzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX
brand logoRyzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX
brand logoRyzen Threadripper 3990X
Mobile Athlon 64 2800+
1 / 1
420
0.0%
brand logoAthlon XP 1800+
brand logoAthlon XP 2200+
brand logoAthlon XP 2500+
brand logoAthlon XP 2700+
brand logoRyzen AI 5 340
brand logoRyzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX
brand logoRyzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX
brand logoRyzen 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.

GX-210JA vs Mobile Athlon 64 2800+ 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.

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

1080P
GX-210JA
low11 FPS
medium11 FPS
high11 FPS
ultra11 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 2800+
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

1080P
GX-210JA
low11 FPS
medium11 FPS
high11 FPS
ultra11 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 2800+
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
League of Legends

League of Legends

1080P
GX-210JA
low11 FPS
medium11 FPS
high11 FPS
ultra11 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 2800+
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
Valorant

Valorant

1080P
GX-210JA
low11 FPS
medium11 FPS
high11 FPS
ultra11 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 2800+
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
Among Us

Among Us

1080P
GX-210JA
low11 FPS
medium11 FPS
high11 FPS
ultra11 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 2800+
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
Apex Legends

Apex Legends

1080P
GX-210JA
low11 FPS
medium11 FPS
high11 FPS
ultra11 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 2800+
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
ARC Raiders

ARC Raiders

1080P
GX-210JA
low11 FPS
medium11 FPS
high11 FPS
ultra11 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 2800+
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
Baldur's Gate 3

Baldur's Gate 3

1080P
GX-210JA
low11 FPS
medium11 FPS
high11 FPS
ultra11 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 2800+
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6

1080P
GX-210JA
low11 FPS
medium11 FPS
high11 FPS
ultra11 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 2800+
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
Call of Duty: Warzone

Call of Duty: Warzone

1080P
GX-210JA
low11 FPS
medium11 FPS
high11 FPS
ultra11 FPS
1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 2800+
low10 FPS
medium10 FPS
high10 FPS
ultra10 FPS
Check FPS with Custom Builds

GX-210JA vs Mobile Athlon 64 2800+: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

GX-210JA

2013

Why buy it

  • ✅Better for gaming: +9.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
  • ✅Draws 1W instead of 512W, a 511W reduction.

Trade-offs

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

Mobile Athlon 64 2800+

2004

Why buy it

    Trade-offs

    • ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than GX-210JA across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
    • ❌Lower PassMark (420 vs 425).
    • ❌51100% higher power demand at 512W vs 1W.

    Quick Answers

    So, is GX-210JA better than Mobile Athlon 64 2800+?
    Yes. GX-210JA is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 9.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 1.2% 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, GX-210JA is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 9.6% 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, GX-210JA is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.
    Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
    GX-210JA still makes the most sense overall. GX-210JA comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 9.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.
    Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
    GX-210JA makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2004) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 1/1. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

    GX-210JA vs Mobile Athlon 64 2800+ Technical Specifications

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

    AMD

    GX-210JA

    The GX-210JA is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 23 May 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Temash (2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FT3. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 425 points. Launch price was $69.

    AMD

    Mobile Athlon 64 2800+

    The Mobile Athlon 64 2800+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Agosto 2004 (21 years ago). It is based on the Oakville (2003−2004) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.8 GHz. L2 cache: 512K. Socket: 754. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB. Memory support: DDR1. Passmark benchmark score: 420 points. Launch price was $69.

    ⚡

    Processing Power

    The GX-210JA packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Mobile Athlon 64 2800+ offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the GX-210JA has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 1 GHz on the GX-210JA versus 1.8 GHz on the Mobile Athlon 64 2800+ — a 57.1% clock advantage for the Mobile Athlon 64 2800+. The GX-210JA uses the Temash (2013) architecture (28 nm), while the Mobile Athlon 64 2800+ uses Oakville (2003−2004). In PassMark, the GX-210JA scores 425 against the Mobile Athlon 64 2800+'s 420 — a 1.2% lead for the GX-210JA.

    FeatureGX-210JAMobile Athlon 64 2800+
    Cores / Threads
    2 / 2+100%
    1 / 1
    Boost Clock
    1 GHz
    1.8 GHz+80%
    L2 Cache
    1 MB
    512K+51100%
    Process
    28 nm
    —
    Architecture
    Temash (2013)
    Oakville (2003−2004)
    PassMark
    425+1%
    420
    🧠

    Memory & Platform

    The GX-210JA uses the FT3 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Mobile Athlon 64 2800+ uses 754 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

    FeatureGX-210JAMobile Athlon 64 2800+
    Socket
    FT3
    754
    PCIe Generation
    PCIe 3.0+173%
    PCIe 1.1
    Max RAM Speed
    —
    400
    Max RAM Capacity
    —
    2
    RAM Channels
    —
    1
    ECC Support
    —
    No
    PCIe Lanes
    —
    0
    🔧

    Advanced Features

    Virtualization: not specified (GX-210JA) / false (Mobile Athlon 64 2800+). Direct competitor: Mobile Athlon 64 2800+ rivals Pentium M 725.

    FeatureGX-210JAMobile Athlon 64 2800+
    Integrated GPU
    —
    No
    IGPU Model
    —
    None
    Unlocked
    —
    No
    AVX-512
    —
    No
    Virtualization
    —
    false