Opteron 144 vs Athlon 64 3000+
Opteron 144
Athlon 64 3000+
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 Opteron 144 is positioned at rank 944 and the Athlon 64 3000+ is on rank 1095, so the Opteron 144 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Opteron 144
Performance Per Dollar Athlon 64 3000+
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Opteron 144 | Athlon 64 3000+ |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($29) | ✅ More affordable ($10) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (SledgeHammer (2003−2005) / 130 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Clawhammer (2001−2005) / 130 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Opteron 144 | Athlon 64 3000+ |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+181%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($29) | ✅ More affordable ($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 Opteron 144 and Athlon 64 3000+
Opteron 144
The Opteron 144 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Junho 2003 (22 years ago). It is based on the SledgeHammer (2003−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: 940. Thermal design power (TDP): 85 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 465 points. Launch price was $65.
Athlon 64 3000+
The Athlon 64 3000+ 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: 450 points. Launch price was $65.
Processing Power
Both the Opteron 144 and Athlon 64 3000+ share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.8 GHz on the Opteron 144 versus 2 GHz on the Athlon 64 3000+ — a 10.5% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 3000+. The Opteron 144 uses the SledgeHammer (2003−2005) architecture (130 nm), while the Athlon 64 3000+ uses Clawhammer (2001−2005) (130 nm). In PassMark, the Opteron 144 scores 465 against the Athlon 64 3000+'s 450 — a 3.3% lead for the Opteron 144. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Opteron 144 | Athlon 64 3000+ |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 1.8 GHz | 2 GHz+11% |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+100% | 512K |
| Process | 130 nm | 130 nm |
| Architecture | SledgeHammer (2003−2005) | Clawhammer (2001−2005) |
| PassMark | 465+3% | 450 |
Memory & Platform
The Opteron 144 uses the 940 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Athlon 64 3000+ uses 754 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR-400 memory speed. Both support up to 4 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 0 PCIe lanes.
| Feature | Opteron 144 | Athlon 64 3000+ |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | 940 | 754 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0+82% | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR-400 | DDR-400 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB | 4 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ✅ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: AMD-V (Opteron 144) / not specified (Athlon 64 3000+). Primary use case: Opteron 144 targets Server Legacy.
| Feature | Opteron 144 | Athlon 64 3000+ |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | — |
| Target Use | Server Legacy | — |
Value Analysis
The Opteron 144 launched at $65 MSRP, while the Athlon 64 3000+ debuted at $149. At current prices ($29 vs $10), the Athlon 64 3000+ is $19 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Opteron 144 delivers 16.0 pts/$ vs 45.0 pts/$ for the Athlon 64 3000+ — making the Athlon 64 3000+ the 94.9% better value option.
| Feature | Opteron 144 | Athlon 64 3000+ |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $65-56% | $149 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $29 | $10-66% |
| Performance per Dollar | 16.0 | 45.0+181% |
| Release Date | 2003 | 2001 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Opteron 144 and Athlon 64 3000+
