Chipversus Index
Jump to Section

Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ vs Sempron 3500+

CPUCPUGPUGPU
AMD

Mobile Athlon 64 3000+

1 Cores1 Thrd512 WWMax: 2 GHz2003
Similar parts
·······
Buy on Amazon
VS
AMD

Sempron 3500+

1 Cores1 Thrd62 WWMax: 2 GHz2005
Similar parts
·······
Buy on Amazon

Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ vs Sempron 3500+ Performance Spectrum

Mobile Athlon 64 3000+
1 / 1
450
0.0%
brand logoAthlon XP 2000+
brand logoAthlon XP 2200+
brand logoAthlon XP 2600+
brand logoAthlon 64 2600+
brand logoRyzen 5 8640HS
brand logoRyzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX
brand logoRyzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX
brand logoRyzen Threadripper 3990X
Sempron 3500+
1 / 1
465
+3.3%
brand logoAthlon XP 2000+
brand logoAthlon XP 2400+
brand logoAthlon XP 2700+
brand logoAthlon XP 3000+
brand logoRyzen 5 8640HS
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.

Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ vs Sempron 3500+ 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
Mobile Athlon 64 3000+
low11 FPS
medium11 FPS
high11 FPS
ultra11 FPS
1080P
Sempron 3500+
low12 FPS
medium12 FPS
high12 FPS
ultra12 FPS
Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 3000+
low11 FPS
medium11 FPS
high11 FPS
ultra11 FPS
1080P
Sempron 3500+
low12 FPS
medium12 FPS
high12 FPS
ultra12 FPS
League of Legends

League of Legends

1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 3000+
low11 FPS
medium11 FPS
high11 FPS
ultra11 FPS
1080P
Sempron 3500+
low12 FPS
medium12 FPS
high12 FPS
ultra12 FPS
Valorant

Valorant

1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 3000+
low11 FPS
medium11 FPS
high11 FPS
ultra11 FPS
1080P
Sempron 3500+
low12 FPS
medium12 FPS
high12 FPS
ultra12 FPS
Among Us

Among Us

1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 3000+
low11 FPS
medium11 FPS
high11 FPS
ultra11 FPS
1080P
Sempron 3500+
low12 FPS
medium12 FPS
high12 FPS
ultra12 FPS
Apex Legends

Apex Legends

1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 3000+
low11 FPS
medium11 FPS
high11 FPS
ultra11 FPS
1080P
Sempron 3500+
low12 FPS
medium12 FPS
high12 FPS
ultra12 FPS
ARC Raiders

ARC Raiders

1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 3000+
low11 FPS
medium11 FPS
high11 FPS
ultra11 FPS
1080P
Sempron 3500+
low12 FPS
medium12 FPS
high12 FPS
ultra12 FPS
Baldur's Gate 3

Baldur's Gate 3

1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 3000+
low11 FPS
medium11 FPS
high11 FPS
ultra11 FPS
1080P
Sempron 3500+
low12 FPS
medium12 FPS
high12 FPS
ultra12 FPS
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6

Call of Duty: Black Ops 6

1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 3000+
low11 FPS
medium11 FPS
high11 FPS
ultra11 FPS
1080P
Sempron 3500+
low12 FPS
medium12 FPS
high12 FPS
ultra12 FPS
Call of Duty: Warzone

Call of Duty: Warzone

1080P
Mobile Athlon 64 3000+
low11 FPS
medium11 FPS
high11 FPS
ultra11 FPS
1080P
Sempron 3500+
low12 FPS
medium12 FPS
high12 FPS
ultra12 FPS
Check FPS with Custom Builds

Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ vs Sempron 3500+: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Mobile Athlon 64 3000+

2003

Why buy it

    Trade-offs

    • ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Sempron 3500+ across 46 shared CPU benchmark tests.
    • ❌Lower PassMark (450 vs 465).
    • ❌725.8% higher power demand at 512W vs 62W.

    Sempron 3500+

    2005

    Why buy it

    • ✅Better for gaming: +9.1% higher average FPS across 46 shared CPU benchmark tests.
    • ✅Draws 62W instead of 512W, a 450W reduction.

    Trade-offs

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

    Quick Answers

    So, is Sempron 3500+ better than Mobile Athlon 64 3000+?
    Yes. Sempron 3500+ is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 9.1% average FPS lead across 46 shared CPU game tests in our data, 3.3% 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, Sempron 3500+ is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 9.1% 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, Sempron 3500+ is the stronger fit. You are getting 3.3% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.
    Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
    Sempron 3500+ still makes the most sense overall. Sempron 3500+ comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 9.1% average FPS lead across 46 shared CPU game tests in our data.
    Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
    Sempron 3500+ makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2005 vs 2003) and more multi-core headroom with 1 cores / 1 threads instead of 1/1. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

    Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ vs Sempron 3500+ Technical Specifications

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

    AMD

    Mobile Athlon 64 3000+

    The Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Agosto 2003 (22 years ago). It is based on the Oakville (2003−2004) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2 GHz. L2 cache: 512K. Socket: 754. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB. Memory support: DDR1. Passmark benchmark score: 450 points. Launch price was $69.

    AMD

    Sempron 3500+

    The Sempron 3500+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 1 October 2005 (20 years ago). It is based on the Palermo (2001−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 256 kB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: 939. Thermal design power (TDP): 62 Watt. Memory support: DDR1. Passmark benchmark score: 465 points. Launch price was $167.

    ⚡

    Processing Power

    Both the Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ and Sempron 3500+ share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2 GHz on the Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ versus 2 GHz on the Sempron 3500+ — identical boost frequencies. The Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ uses the Oakville (2003−2004) architecture, while the Sempron 3500+ uses Palermo (2001−2005) (90 nm). In PassMark, the Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ scores 450 against the Sempron 3500+'s 465 — a 3.3% lead for the Sempron 3500+.

    FeatureMobile Athlon 64 3000+Sempron 3500+
    Cores / Threads
    1 / 1
    1 / 1
    Boost Clock
    2 GHz
    2 GHz
    L3 Cache
    —
    0 kB
    L2 Cache
    512K+100%
    256 kB
    Process
    —
    90 nm
    Architecture
    Oakville (2003−2004)
    Palermo (2001−2005)
    PassMark
    450
    465+3%
    🧠

    Memory & Platform

    The Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ uses the 754 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Sempron 3500+ uses 939 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

    FeatureMobile Athlon 64 3000+Sempron 3500+
    Socket
    754
    939
    PCIe Generation
    PCIe 1.1
    PCIe 2.0+82%
    Max RAM Speed
    400
    —
    Max RAM Capacity
    2
    —
    RAM Channels
    1
    —
    ECC Support
    No
    —
    PCIe Lanes
    0
    —
    🔧

    Advanced Features

    Virtualization: false (Mobile Athlon 64 3000+) / not specified (Sempron 3500+). Direct competitor: Mobile Athlon 64 3000+ rivals Pentium M 735.

    FeatureMobile Athlon 64 3000+Sempron 3500+
    Integrated GPU
    No
    —
    IGPU Model
    None
    —
    Unlocked
    No
    —
    AVX-512
    No
    —
    Virtualization
    false
    —