AMD Athlon 240GE vs Intel Core i3-4150 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data leaves no ambiguity: the AMD Athlon 240GE wins every head-to-head comparison in this dataset, and it does so by a remarkably consistent margin. Across five Cinebench tests, the AMD part leads the Intel Core i3-4150 by a deltaPct ranging from 34.2% to 34.7%. That uniformity is striking — it suggests a fundamental per-clock or architectural advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The most decisive result is in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the Athlon 240GE scores 390 against the i3-4150's 290. That 34.5% delta translates to a 100-point gap, a substantial chasm for two processors that both feature 2 cores and 4 threads. The single-core Cinebench R20 test tells a similar story: 229 for AMD versus 170 for Intel, a 34.7% advantage — the largest relative margin in the entire head-to-head set.

Cinebench R23, the most modern renderer in this group, reinforces the pattern. The Athlon 240GE posts 3876 in multi-core and 547 in single-core, while the i3-4150 manages 2888 and 407, respectively. Those deltas — 34.2% and 34.4% — are essentially identical to the R15 and R20 results. There is no test where the Intel part closes the gap, nor any where the AMD part falters. The wins column reads 5 for AMD, 0 for Intel.

The average benchmark scores corroborate the head-to-head outcome, though they compress the difference. The Athlon 240GE's average is 1121, while the i3-4150 sits at 1119 — a 0.2% gap. This near-parity in aggregate is notable given the Cinebench deltas, and it stems from the fact that the Intel part has additional benchmarks in its list (Geekbench multi-core and single-core) that the AMD part lacks. Those Geekbench results — 1896 multi-core and 968 single-core — are not contested in the head-to-head table, so they only appear in the average. Still, when the two processors are directly compared on identical workloads, the Athlon 240GE is consistently one-third ahead.

The percentile ranking offers context: both CPUs land at the 32nd percentile among all CPUs in the database. That places them in the same broad performance tier, even though the AMD part dominates in direct comparisons. The nearest-rival table for the Athlon 240GE lists the i3-4150 at a 0.2% delta from its average score, while the i3-4150's nearest rivals include the Athlon 240GE at a -0.1% delta. These are essentially tied processors in aggregate terms, which makes the head-to-head sweep all the more telling — the AMD chip converts its architectural edge into concrete rendering wins across every Cinebench generation.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Athlon 240GE has an average benchmark score of 1121, while the Intel Core i3-4150 scores 1119. The difference is 0.2% in favor of AMD.

Q: What is the largest margin of victory in the head-to-head tests?

A: The largest delta is 34.7% in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the Athlon 240GE scores 229 versus the i3-4150's 170. The smallest margin is 34.2% in both Cinebench R20 multi-core and Cinebench R23 multi-core.

Q: Does the Intel Core i3-4150 win any benchmark in the head-to-head data?

A: No. The head-to-head table shows 5 wins for the AMD Athlon 240GE and 0 wins for the Intel Core i3-4150 across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 tests.

Q: How do the two CPUs compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The AMD Athlon 240GE scores 3876, while the Intel Core i3-4150 scores 2888. The delta is 34.2% in favor of AMD.

Q: What are the Geekbench scores for the Intel Core i3-4150?

A: The i3-4150 scores 1896 in Geekbench multi-core and 968 in Geekbench single-core. The Athlon 240GE does not have Geekbench results in the provided data.

Q: Are both processors in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both the AMD Athlon 240GE and the Intel Core i3-4150 are at the 32nd percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from fundamentally different design generations. The AMD Athlon 240GE uses the Zen architecture, specifically the Raven Ridge variant, built on a 14 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The Intel Core i3-4150 uses the Haswell architecture on Intel's 22 nm process. This process-node gap — 14 nm versus 22 nm — is a major factor behind the AMD part's consistent 34% lead in Cinebench, as the smaller node allows for higher efficiency and denser logic.

The transistor counts differ dramatically. The Athlon 240GE integrates 4,950 million transistors on a 209.8 mm² die, while the i3-4150 has 1,400 million transistors on a 177 mm² die. That 3.5x transistor advantage for AMD reflects the inclusion of a more modern integrated graphics unit (Radeon Vega 3 versus Intel HD 4400) and a more complex memory controller, among other features. The die-size difference is modest (209.8 mm² versus 177 mm²), but the transistor density is far higher on the 14 nm part.

Cache hierarchies also diverge. The Athlon 240GE has 96 KB of L1 per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3. The i3-4150 has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 3 MB of shared L3. The AMD part offers 50% more L1 per core, double the L2 per core, and 1 MB more L3. For render workloads like Cinebench, larger caches can reduce memory stalls and improve throughput, which aligns with the benchmark results.

The memory interfaces are entirely different generations. The Athlon 240GE supports DDR4 with a dual-channel bus and a theoretical bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. The i3-4150 supports DDR3 with a dual-channel bus and 25.6 GB/s bandwidth. That 67% bandwidth advantage for AMD is substantial, especially for multi-core rendering that streams large datasets. PCIe connectivity also differs: the AMD part provides 8 CPU lanes of Gen 3 PCIe, while the Intel part offers 16 Gen 3 lanes. Neither chip supports ECC memory.

The integrated GPUs are another architectural split. AMD pairs the CPU cores with Radeon Vega 3 graphics, while Intel embeds HD 4400. The manufacturing foundry differs too — GlobalFoundries for AMD, Intel's own fabs for Intel. Both parts are desktop-oriented, but the Athlon 240GE remains in active production, whereas the i3-4150 is end-of-life.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are identical: both have 2 cores and 4 threads. The base clock is also the same at 3.50 GHz, with no boost clock on either part. The differences begin with TDP — the Athlon 240GE draws 35 W, while the i3-4150 draws 54 W. That 19 W gap makes the AMD chip notably more power-efficient, especially given its superior benchmark performance.

The sockets are incompatible: AMD uses Socket AM4, while Intel uses Socket 1150. The process node differs (14 nm versus 22 nm), as does the foundry (GlobalFoundries versus Intel). The transistor count (4,950 million versus 1,400 million) and die size (209.8 mm² versus 177 mm²) are also distinct. Memory support is DDR4 for AMD and DDR3 for Intel, with bandwidth figures of 42.7 GB/s and 25.6 GB/s, respectively.

Cache capacities differ at every level: L1 is 96 KB per core versus 64 KB per core, L2 is 512 KB per core versus 256 KB per core, and L3 is 4 MB shared versus 3 MB shared. PCIe lanes are 8 for AMD versus 16 for Intel, both Gen 3. The integrated graphics are Radeon Vega 3 versus Intel HD 4400. The release dates are far apart — the Athlon 240GE launched on 2018-12-20, while the i3-4150 launched on 2014-04-30. The launch MSRP is $75 for the AMD part and $117 for the Intel part. The production status differs: AMD is active, Intel is end-of-life. Neither part has an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The data points in one direction. The AMD Athlon 240GE wins every Cinebench comparison by a margin between 34.2% and 34.7%, while consuming 19 W less power (35 W versus 54 W). The Intel Core i3-4150 does not win a single head-to-head test in this dataset. The average benchmark scores are nearly identical (1121 versus 1119), but that parity is misleading because the Intel part's Geekbench results are not directly contested. On shared workloads — all five Cinebench tests — AMD is uniformly ahead.

For a user choosing between these two, the Athlon 240GE is the stronger processor for rendering and multi-threaded productivity, based strictly on the benchmark evidence. It also offers the advantages of a newer socket (AM4), DDR4 memory support, and higher memory bandwidth. The i3-4150 retains one clear edge: 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes versus 8, which matters for systems with multiple expansion cards or high-bandwidth storage. The Intel part also has Geekbench scores that are not matched by the AMD part, so its aggregate average is competitive.

The production status is decisive for new builds: the Athlon 240GE is active, while the i3-4150 is end-of-life. The launch MSRP of $75 versus $117 further favors AMD, though the Intel part's age means street pricing may differ. Ultimately, the benchmark sweep, lower TDP, and active production status make the Athlon 240GE the data-supported pick for most workloads.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Athlon 240GE wins in every directly compared benchmark category. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 390 versus 290, a 34.5% lead. In R20 multi-core, it scores 1627 versus 1212, a 34.2% lead. In R20 single-core, it scores 229 versus 170, a 34.7% lead. In R23 multi-core, it scores 3876 versus 2888, a 34.2% lead. In R23 single-core, it scores 547 versus 407, a 34.4% lead. These are consistent wins across two generations of Cinebench and both single- and multi-threaded workloads. The Athlon 240GE is also the only one of the two that is still in active production, and it does all this at a 35 W TDP versus 54 W.

The Intel Core i3-4150 has no head-to-head benchmark wins, but it does have two Geekbench results that the AMD part lacks in this dataset: 1896 multi-core and 968 single-core. Those scores contribute to its average benchmark score of 1119, which is nearly identical to the Athlon 240GE's 1121. The Intel part also offers 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, twice the AMD part's 8 lanes, which could benefit systems with multiple GPUs or NVMe drives. For users already invested in the Socket 1150 platform or DDR3 memory, the i3-4150 provides a drop-in upgrade path, though its end-of-life status limits future support.

In practical terms, the Athlon 240GE is the better choice for CPU-bound rendering, content creation, and any workload that leverages Cinebench-style multi-threading. The i3-4150's potential advantages lie in platform compatibility and I/O expansion, not raw compute performance as measured here. The benchmark data is unambiguous: 5 wins for AMD, 0 for Intel, with margins that never dip below 34%.