AMD Athlon 64 4000+ (F3)

The AMD Athlon 64 4000+ (F3) is a single-core desktop processor from AMD’s 4000 series, built on the K8 architecture with the Orleans codename and a 90 nm process node. It operates at a base clock of 2.60 GHz with one core and one thread, paired with 128 KB of L1 cache and 512 KB of L2 cache, and carries a TDP of 59 watts. Released in February 2007 for the AMD Socket AM2 platform, this part supports dual-channel DDR2 memory and PCIe Gen 2, though it lacks integrated graphics unless paired with a chipset that provides them. The data in the the benchmark database shows no benchmark scores, no nearest rivals, and an average benchmark score of zero, placing it at the 50th percentile among all CPUs, a position that reflects its end-of-life status and limited performance relevance in modern workloads.

Benchmark Performance

The the benchmark database reports an average benchmark score of 0 for the AMD Athlon 64 4000+ (F3), with no individual benchmark entries and no nearestRivals data. Consequently, there are no absolute scores or percentage deltas to compare against competing processors. The percentileVsAllCpus field sits at 50, meaning this chip performs at the midpoint of the distribution of all CPUs tracked in the database, a statistical default that indicates the absence of measured performance rather than a genuine competitive standing. Without any benchmark results, the data cannot substantiate performance claims relative to any specific rival, nor can it quantify strengths or weaknesses in synthetic workloads. The absence of scores also means that any interpretation of single-threaded or multi-threaded capability must rely solely on the architectural specifications listed in the the benchmark database, such as the single core, single thread, and 2.60 GHz base clock. In practical terms, the 50th percentile placement is a placeholder, not a verdict, and the processor’s end-of-life production status further underscores that no modern benchmark data was captured for this unit.

How It Compares

The the benchmark database lists no nearestRivals for the AMD Athlon 64 4000+ (F3), so there are no rival names, scores, or deltaPct values to reference. Without this data, any comparison must be framed qualitatively, using only the processor’s own specifications. Given that it is a single-core, single-thread part from the K8 architecture with a 2.60 GHz clock, it would logically sit far behind any multi-core processor in heavily threaded workloads, but the dataset provides no concrete numbers to support such a claim. The lack of rival entries means the benchmark database does not consider this chip competitive with any currently tracked processor, which aligns with its 2007 release date and end-of-life status. The absence of comparison data is itself informative: it signals that the Athlon 64 4000+ (F3) has been effectively retired from active performance tracking, and no contemporary CPU is close enough in performance to warrant a direct delta calculation. As a result, the analysis must avoid speculating on specific percentage advantages or deficits, instead noting that the processor’s single-core design and lack of boost clock leave it structurally limited against any modern multi-core or higher-clocked alternative.

Single-Thread vs Multi-Thread Behavior

The AMD Athlon 64 4000+ (F3) features exactly one core and one thread, with a base clock of 2.60 GHz and no boost clock. This configuration means the processor has no multi-threaded capability in the traditional sense, it can execute only a single instruction stream at a time. The L1 cache is 128 KB and L2 cache is 512 KB, which are modest by modern standards but were typical for single-core K8 processors of its era. The single-thread vs multi-thread split is therefore binary: all workloads are single-threaded by definition. For real-world applications, this implies that the processor’s performance is entirely dependent on its clock speed and per-core efficiency. At 2.60 GHz, the K8 architecture’s IPC (instructions per clock) is far lower than that of later AMD or Intel designs, but the the benchmark database does not provide IPC data. What the data does show is that the processor cannot benefit from any parallelization; multi-threaded tasks such as video rendering, compilation, or database queries would see no scaling because there is only one thread available. Conversely, lightly threaded workloads, legacy applications, single-threaded games, or simple office tasks, would use the full capability of the single core, but the lack of a boost clock means there is no headroom beyond the fixed 2.60 GHz. The absence of a boost clock also eliminates any dynamic frequency adjustment, so thermal or power headroom cannot translate into higher performance. In summary, the chip’s behavior is purely single-threaded, and its performance ceiling is locked at the base clock, making it unsuitable for any workload that expects multi-core scaling.

Who Should Consider It

Given the the benchmark database’s data, the AMD Athlon 64 4000+ (F3) is a single-core, single-thread processor with a 2.60 GHz base clock, no boost clock, and a 50th percentile ranking among all CPUs, though that percentile is unverified due to zero benchmark scores. For gaming, this processor would only be relevant for extremely old titles from the mid-2000s that were designed for single-core CPUs; modern games require multiple cores and far higher IPC, so the data (no scores, no rivals) cannot support any recommendation for contemporary gaming. For content creation, video editing, 3D rendering, or audio production, the single-thread limitation is disqualifying, as all such workloads benefit from multi-threading, which this chip cannot provide. Office and productivity tasks that are fundamentally single-threaded, such as word processing, spreadsheet calculations, or web browsing, might technically run, but the 2.60 GHz clock and 90 nm process node suggest very low performance compared to any modern processor; however, the the benchmark database provides no comparative scores to quantify this. The processor’s memory support for dual-channel DDR2 and PCIe Gen 2 also indicates an outdated platform, which would bottleneck any peripheral or storage device. In short, the data suggests this processor is only for legacy systems running period-appropriate software, and even then, the lack of benchmark scores means no performance validation exists. The 50th percentile is a default placeholder, not an endorsement, so no workload category can be recommended with confidence based on the the benchmark database alone.

Power and Thermals

The AMD Athlon 64 4000+ (F3) carries a TDP of 59 watts, which classifies it as a low-power part by the standards of its 2007 release. This TDP figure, combined with the 90 nm process node and 154 million transistors on a 103.1 mm² die, indicates a modest thermal envelope. A 59-watt TDP typically requires only a basic air cooler, a simple aluminum heatsink with a small fan would suffice for stock operation, as there is no boost clock to generate transient thermal spikes. The processor’s single core and single thread also contribute to lower thermal output, as only one execution unit is active at any time. The socket is AMD Socket AM2, which supports standard cooling solutions of that era, and the lack of an unlocked multiplier means no overclocking headroom is officially provided, further stabilizing thermal behavior. The 90 nm process node is relatively large by modern standards, which generally leads to higher leakage currents, but the 59-watt TDP suggests AMD designed this part to stay within a conservative power budget. The memory controller is integrated on the die, as is typical for K8 architecture, which adds some heat but is accounted for in the 59-watt figure. For cooling tier, the data implies that a stock cooler included with the processor would be adequate; no high-end cooling solution is necessary given the locked clock and absence of boost behavior. The end-of-life status means that thermal performance is no longer a concern for new builds, but for anyone retrofitting this CPU into an AM2 board, a standard 59-watt-class cooler will keep temperatures in check, based on the TDP alone. Without wattage figures for competitors or thermal resistance data, no further quantitative analysis is possible, but the 59-watt TDP is a clear indicator of a low-heat, low-power desktop processor suited for basic cooling.