Ryzen 5 5625U vs Athlon 64 X2 3800+

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon 64 X2 3800+
2005
2 cores / 2 threads, 89 Watt
0.40
Ryzen 5 5625U
2022
6 cores / 12 threads, 15 Watt
9.38
+2245%

Ryzen 5 5625U outperforms Athlon 64 X2 3800+ by a whopping 2245% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon 64 X2 3800+ and Ryzen 5 5625U processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3014816
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD Cezanne (Zen 3, Ryzen 5000)
Power efficiency0.4359.18
Architecture codenameManchester (2005−2006)Barcelo-U (Zen 3) (2022)
Release dateAugust 2005 (19 years ago)6 January 2022 (2 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Athlon 64 X2 3800+ and Ryzen 5 5625U basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores2 (Dual-core)6 (Hexa-Core)
Threads212
Base clock speedno data2.3 GHz
Boost clock speed2 GHz4.3 GHz
L1 cache256K64K (per core)
L2 cache512 KB512K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB16 MB (shared)
Chip lithography90 nm7 nm
Die size220 mm2180 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data95 °C
Number of transistors154 million10,700 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on Athlon 64 X2 3800+ and Ryzen 5 5625U compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration11
Socket939FP6
Power consumption (TDP)89 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 X2 3800+ and Ryzen 5 5625U. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+
Precision Boost 2no data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 64 X2 3800+ and Ryzen 5 5625U are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 X2 3800+ and Ryzen 5 5625U. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR4

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon RX Vega 7 ( - 1800 MHz)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon 64 X2 3800+ and Ryzen 5 5625U.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data16

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 0.40
Ryzen 5 5625U 9.38
+2245%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 629
Ryzen 5 5625U 14897
+2268%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 203
Ryzen 5 5625U 1589
+683%

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 376
Ryzen 5 5625U 5513
+1366%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.40 9.38
Physical cores 2 6
Threads 2 12
Chip lithography 90 nm 7 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 89 Watt 15 Watt

Ryzen 5 5625U has a 2245% higher aggregate performance score, 200% more physical cores and 500% more threads, a 1185.7% more advanced lithography process, and 493.3% lower power consumption.

The Ryzen 5 5625U is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon 64 X2 3800+ in performance tests.

Note that Athlon 64 X2 3800+ is a desktop processor while Ryzen 5 5625U is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 X2 3800+ and Ryzen 5 5625U, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+
Athlon 64 X2 3800+
AMD Ryzen 5 5625U
Ryzen 5 5625U

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


2.9 94 votes

Rate Athlon 64 X2 3800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
4.2 1202 votes

Rate Ryzen 5 5625U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon 64 X2 3800+ or Ryzen 5 5625U, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.