A4-3330MX vs Athlon X2 QL-60

A4-3330MX vs Athlon X2 QL-60 Performance Spectrum

A4-3330MX

2 / 2

1,264

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Athlon X2 QL-60

2 / 2

1,273

+0.7%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

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.

A4-3330MX vs Athlon X2 QL-60 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.

A4-3330MX vs Athlon X2 QL-60: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A4-3330MX

2011

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 6480G, while Athlon X2 QL-60 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,264 vs 1,273).
❌4400% higher power demand at 45W vs 1W.

Athlon X2 QL-60

2008

Why buy it

✅+0.7% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 1W instead of 45W, a 44W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌No integrated graphics, while A4-3330MX can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon X2 QL-60 better than A4-3330MX?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A4-3330MX is ahead with 36.8% higher max boost clock. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Athlon X2 QL-60 pulls ahead with 0.7% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Athlon X2 QL-60 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Athlon X2 QL-60 still makes the most sense overall. Athlon X2 QL-60 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.7% better PassMark.

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

A4-3330MX makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2008). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A4-3330MX vs Athlon X2 QL-60 Technical Specifications

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

A4-3330MX

The A4-3330MX 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 2.2 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): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,264 points. Launch price was $50.

Athlon X2 QL-60

The Athlon X2 QL-60 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Lion (2008−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.9 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: S1. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,273 points. Launch price was $149.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A4-3330MX and Athlon X2 QL-60 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the A4-3330MX versus 1.9 GHz on the Athlon X2 QL-60 — a 31.1% clock advantage for the A4-3330MX. The A4-3330MX uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Athlon X2 QL-60 uses Lion (2008−2009) (65 nm). In PassMark, the A4-3330MX scores 1,264 against the Athlon X2 QL-60's 1,273 — a 0.7% lead for the Athlon X2 QL-60. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	A4-3330MX	Athlon X2 QL-60
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.6 GHz+37%	1.9 GHz
Base Clock	2.2 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB (per core)	1 MB
Process	32 nm-51%	65 nm
Architecture	Llano (2011−2012)	Lion (2008−2009)
PassMark	1,264	1,273
Geekbench 6 Single	263	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-3330MX uses the FS1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Athlon X2 QL-60 uses S1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the A4-3330MX versus DDR2-667 on the Athlon X2 QL-60 — the A4-3330MX supports 99.9% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A4-3330MX supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (A4-3330MX) vs 0 (Athlon X2 QL-60) — the A4-3330MX offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A4-3330MX	Athlon X2 QL-60
Socket	FS1	S1
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333+100%	DDR2-667
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+100%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (A4-3330MX) / not specified (Athlon X2 QL-60). The A4-3330MX includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 6480G), while the Athlon X2 QL-60 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-3330MX targets Budget Laptop. Direct competitor: A4-3330MX rivals Pentium B980.