CPU
GPU
A4-3320M
Athlon II X2 260
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The A4-3320M is positioned at rank 861 and the Athlon II X2 260 is on rank 780, so the Athlon II X2 260 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar A4-3320M
Performance Per Dollar Athlon II X2 260
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | A4-3320M | Athlon II X2 260 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($12) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Llano (2011−2012) / 32 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Regor (2009−2013) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | A4-3320M | Athlon II X2 260 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($12) |
Performance Check
To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.
Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of A4-3320M and Athlon II X2 260
A4-3320M
The A4-3320M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Llano (2011−2012) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FS1. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,241 points. Launch price was $50.
Athlon II X2 260
The Athlon II X2 260 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 11 May 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Regor (2009−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,248 points. Launch price was $48.
Processing Power
Both the A4-3320M and Athlon II X2 260 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the A4-3320M versus 3.2 GHz on the Athlon II X2 260 — a 20.7% clock advantage for the Athlon II X2 260 (base: 2 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The A4-3320M uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Athlon II X2 260 uses Regor (2009−2013) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A4-3320M scores 1,241 against the Athlon II X2 260's 1,248 — a 0.6% lead for the Athlon II X2 260. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | A4-3320M | Athlon II X2 260 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.6 GHz | 3.2 GHz+23% |
| Base Clock | 2 GHz | 3.2 GHz+60% |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1 MB |
| Process | 32 nm-29% | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Llano (2011−2012) | Regor (2009−2013) |
| PassMark | 1,241 | 1,248 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 251 | — |
Memory & Platform
The A4-3320M uses the FS1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Athlon II X2 260 uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the A4-3320M versus 1333 on the Athlon II X2 260 — the Athlon II X2 260 supports 199.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 16 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (A4-3320M) vs 0 (Athlon II X2 260) — the A4-3320M offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.
| Feature | A4-3320M | Athlon II X2 260 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FS1 | AM3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1333 | 1333+44333% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB+104857500% | 16 |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (A4-3320M) vs true (Athlon II X2 260). The A4-3320M includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 6480G), while the Athlon II X2 260 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-3320M targets Budget Laptop. Direct competitor: A4-3320M rivals Pentium B970; Athlon II X2 260 rivals Pentium E6700.
| Feature | A4-3320M | Athlon II X2 260 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | Radeon HD 6480G | None |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | true |
| Target Use | Budget Laptop | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on A4-3320M and Athlon II X2 260
