A10-7890K vs Athlon II X4 651

A10-7890K vs Athlon II X4 651 Performance Spectrum

A10-7890K

4 / 4

3,537

0.0%

Athlon II X3 460

Athlon II X4 641

Athlon X4 850

Ryzen Embedded R1305G

Ryzen 7 6800HS

Ryzen AI Max 390

Ryzen 9 9955HX3D

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Athlon II X4 651

4 / 4

3,584

+1.3%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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.

A10-7890K vs Athlon II X4 651 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

A10-7890K vs Athlon II X4 651: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

A10-7890K

2016

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +6.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 95W instead of 100W, a 5W reduction.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R7, while Athlon II X4 651 needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Athlon II X4 651.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,537 vs 3,584).

Athlon II X4 651

2011

Why buy it

✅+1.3% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than A10-7890K across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Launch MSRP is still $92 MSRP, while A10-7890K mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while A10-7890K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A10-7890K.

Quick Answers

So, is A10-7890K better than Athlon II X4 651?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A10-7890K is ahead with a 6.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Athlon II X4 651 pulls ahead with 1.3% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Athlon II X4 651 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.3% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

A10-7890K is still the much better call for a fresh build. A10-7890K comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $92 MSRP, and it still gives you a 6.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Athlon II X4 651 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2011 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (39.0 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on FM1.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

A10-7890K makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2016 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A10-7890K vs Athlon II X4 651 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

A10-7890K

The A10-7890K is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 11 January 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Godaveri (2014−2016) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 4 GHz, with boost up to 4.3 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 4096 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FM2+. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-2133. Passmark benchmark score: 3,537 points. Launch price was $150.

Athlon II X4 651

The Athlon II X4 651 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Llano (2011−2012) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM1. Thermal design power (TDP): 100 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,584 points. Launch price was $149.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A10-7890K and Athlon II X4 651 share an identical 4-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 4.3 GHz on the A10-7890K versus 3 GHz on the Athlon II X4 651 — a 35.6% clock advantage for the A10-7890K (base: 4 GHz vs 3 GHz). The A10-7890K uses the Godaveri (2014−2016) architecture (28 nm), while the Athlon II X4 651 uses Llano (2011−2012) (32 nm). In PassMark, the A10-7890K scores 3,537 against the Athlon II X4 651's 3,584 — a 1.3% lead for the Athlon II X4 651. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	A10-7890K	Athlon II X4 651
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 4
Boost Clock	4.3 GHz+43%	3 GHz
Base Clock	4 GHz+33%	3 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	4096 kB+300%	1 MB (per core)
Process	28 nm-13%	32 nm
Architecture	Godaveri (2014−2016)	Llano (2011−2012)
PassMark	3,537	3,584+1%
Geekbench 6 Single	600	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A10-7890K uses the FM2+ socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Athlon II X4 651 uses FM1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-2133 on the A10-7890K versus DDR3-1866 on the Athlon II X4 651 — the A10-7890K supports 14.3% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A10-7890K supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: A55,A68H,A75,A78,A85X,A88X (A10-7890K) and AMD FM1 (Athlon II X4 651).

Feature	A10-7890K	Athlon II X4 651
Socket	FM2+	FM1
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-2133+14%	DDR3-1866
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB+100%	16 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (A10-7890K) / not specified (Athlon II X4 651). The A10-7890K includes integrated graphics (Radeon R7), while the Athlon II X4 651 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A10-7890K targets Budget. Direct competitor: A10-7890K rivals Core i3-6100.