AMD Athlon II X3 400e

The AMD Athlon II X3 400e is a 45 W desktop processor from the K10/Rana generation, released on 2009-10-19. It has 3 cores and 3 threads at a 2.20 GHz base clock with no boost clock. Its average benchmark score is 386, which places it in the 4th percentile of the database. That low percentile frames the entire analysis: this is a legacy low-power part whose performance clusters tightly around a group of similarly modest CPUs.

Benchmark Performance

The Cinebench results confirm a low overall position. The Athlon II X3 400e scores 113 in Cinebench R15 multicore, 471 in Cinebench R20 multicore, and 1122 in Cinebench R23 multicore. Single-core results are 66 in Cinebench R20 and 158 in Cinebench R23. These are not competitive numbers in an absolute sense; the 4th percentile rank among all CPUs shows that the vast majority of tested processors score higher.

Aggregate performance is best understood through the average benchmark score of 386. The nearest rivals are all within a very narrow band. Intel Core i3-3217U matches it exactly with an average score of 386 and a deltaPct of 0. Intel Celeron 3205U scores 385 with a deltaPct of 0.3, meaning the Athlon holds a small aggregate edge. AMD Athlon II X2 270 scores 387 with a deltaPct of -0.3, so the X3 400e is slightly behind. Intel Celeron G1610T scores 388 with a deltaPct of -0.4, the largest deficit among the listed rivals. None of these gaps are meaningful in real-world terms; the entire group sits in the same performance class.

The benchmark data also shows that the multicore results scale with the three physical threads, but the single-core baseline is so low that even the multicore scores remain small. For example, the R20 multicore score of 471 is low next to any modern desktop processor, and the R23 multicore score of 1122 remains within a modest range. The average score of 386, combined with the 4th percentile rank, indicates a chip designed for low power draw rather than peak throughput.

Power and Thermals

The TDP is 45 W, which places the Athlon II X3 400e in a low-power desktop class. That rating is the primary thermal specification in the data. The processor is built on a 45 nm process with 300 million transistors and a 169 mm² die. For its age, the combination of a 45 W TDP, three cores, and no boost clock keeps thermal output predictable.

Because the chip has no boost clock, the operating frequency stays at 2.20 GHz under sustained load. There is no turbo headroom to create short bursts of higher heat. As a result, the cooling requirement is modest: a basic desktop cooler intended for low-power parts is sufficient. The 45 W TDP also makes the processor interesting for small or quiet builds where thermal load is a concern, although the performance ceiling is correspondingly low. The 45 nm node is old by modern standards, but the low TDP and small core count prevent that from translating into a demanding cooling situation.

Single-Thread vs Multi-Thread Behavior

The single-thread results are 66 in Cinebench R20 and 158 in Cinebench R23. These are low scores, and they define the processor’s behavior in lightly threaded workloads. Applications that depend on one or two threads will see the weakest performance because the base clock of 2.20 GHz is modest and there is no boost capability.

Since the processor has 3 cores and 3 threads, there is no simultaneous multithreading to extract extra work per core. The multicore scores — 471 in R20 and 1122 in R23 — are higher than the single-thread scores because the three physical cores can work in parallel. However, the absolute multicore performance is still low in the database context. The spread between single-thread and multicore scores suggests that workloads that can use all three cores are better served than single-threaded workloads, but both cases remain firmly in the low end of the performance spectrum.

In real workloads, the practical implication is straightforward. Lightly threaded office tasks will be limited by the single-core score. Multithreaded workloads will benefit from the three cores, but the 471 and 1122 multicore results show there is not enough aggregate throughput for demanding rendering or heavy productivity tasks. The absence of L3 cache and the presence of only 512 KB of L2 per core further reinforce a cache hierarchy that is modest by any standard.

How It Compares

Intel Core i3-3217U: This is a perfect tie in aggregate terms. The Athlon II X3 400e has an average score of 386, and the Core i3-3217U also has an average score of 386, with a deltaPct of 0. The data shows no measurable difference between these two parts in overall benchmark results.

Intel Celeron 3205U: The Celeron 3205U averages 385, with a deltaPct of 0.3. That puts the Athlon II X3 400e slightly ahead in aggregate performance. The margin is small enough that the two chips effectively occupy the same tier, but the direction of the comparison favors the AMD part.

AMD Athlon II X2 270: The Athlon II X2 270 averages 387, with a deltaPct of -0.3. Despite the X3 naming on the 400e, the X2 270 is the slightly faster processor in aggregate benchmark terms. The difference is minor, yet it indicates that the extra core in the 400e does not overcome the other part’s overall scoring edge.

Intel Celeron G1610T: The Celeron G1610T averages 388, with a deltaPct of -0.4. This is the highest average score among the four nearest rivals. The Athlon II X3 400e trails it by the largest margin found in this comparison, although the gap is still only 0.4 percentage points.

Platform and Compatibility

The Athlon II X3 400e uses AMD Socket AM3. Memory support is DDR3 with a dual-channel bus; ECC memory is not supported. The processor provides PCIe Gen 2, and integrated graphics are available only on certain motherboards as a chipset feature, not on the CPU itself. The multiplier is locked, so overclocking is not supported by the data.

The architecture is K10 with the Rana codename, fabricated on a 45 nm process. The cache layout includes 128 KB of L1 per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, with no L3 cache. The part number is AD400EHDK32GIAD405EHDGIBOX. Production status is end-of-life, and the release date is 2009-10-19.

For platform planning, the AM3 socket and DDR3 memory support define the boundaries. This is a legacy platform, so any build around this processor must use components from the same generation. The lack of CPU-integrated graphics means display output depends on either a discrete PCIe Gen 2 graphics card or a motherboard chipset that provides graphics functionality. The locked multiplier further limits user control over performance tuning.

FAQ

Q: How many cores and threads does the AMD Athlon II X3 400e have?

A: It has 3 cores and 3 threads.

Q: Does the processor support ECC memory?

A: No, ECC memory is not supported.

Q: What socket does the Athlon II X3 400e use?

A: It uses AMD Socket AM3.

Q: Does the processor include integrated graphics?

A: Integrated graphics are available only on certain motherboards as a chipset feature; the CPU itself does not include them by default.

Q: What is the TDP of this processor?

A: The TDP is 45 W.

Q: Is the multiplier unlocked?

A: No, the multiplier is locked.

Who Should Consider It

The AMD Athlon II X3 400e is only appropriate for workloads that match its low benchmark position. The 4th percentile rank and the average score of 386 indicate a processor at the bottom of the database. Office productivity, basic web use, and light legacy software are consistent with the single-core score of 66 in R20 and the multicore score of 471 in R20. These tasks do not demand high sustained throughput.

Creation workloads are not supported by the data. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 1122 is far too low for video rendering, 3D modeling, or heavy content production. Gaming-specific benchmark results are not present in the data, but the overall score floor provides no evidence that the processor would handle demanding gaming loads. The 45 W TDP makes it a candidate for low-power or quiet legacy builds, provided the workload expectations are modest.

In short, this is a processor for users who need a simple, low-power AM3 chip for everyday tasks, not for users chasing modern application performance. The benchmark evidence consistently places the Athlon II X3 400e among the weakest entries in the database, alongside other ultra-low-power CPUs from the same era.