A4-4020 vs Athlon X2 QL-60

A4-4020 vs Athlon X2 QL-60 Performance Spectrum

A4-4020

2 / 2

1,269

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Athlon X2 QL-60

2 / 2

1,273

+0.3%

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.

A4-4020 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.

A4-4020 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.

A4-4020

2014

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 7480D, while Athlon X2 QL-60 needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Athlon X2 QL-60.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,269 vs 1,273).
❌6400% higher power demand at 65W vs 1W.

Athlon X2 QL-60

2008

Why buy it

✅+0.3% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 1W instead of 65W, a 64W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌No integrated graphics, while A4-4020 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike A4-4020.

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon X2 QL-60 better than A4-4020?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A4-4020 is ahead with a 0.6% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Athlon X2 QL-60 pulls ahead with 0.3% 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 0.3% 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 0.3% better PassMark.

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

A4-4020 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2008). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A4-4020 vs Athlon X2 QL-60 Technical Specifications

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

A4-4020

The A4-4020 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Richland (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB (total). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1333. Passmark benchmark score: 1,269 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 A4-4020 and Athlon X2 QL-60 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.4 GHz on the A4-4020 versus 1.9 GHz on the Athlon X2 QL-60 — a 56.6% clock advantage for the A4-4020. The A4-4020 uses the Richland (2013−2014) architecture (32 nm), while the Athlon X2 QL-60 uses Lion (2008−2009) (65 nm). In PassMark, the A4-4020 scores 1,269 against the Athlon X2 QL-60's 1,273 — a 0.3% lead for the Athlon X2 QL-60.

Feature	A4-4020	Athlon X2 QL-60
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	3.4 GHz+79%	1.9 GHz
Base Clock	3.2 GHz	—
L3 Cache	—	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB (total)	1 MB
Process	32 nm-51%	65 nm
Architecture	Richland (2013−2014)	Lion (2008−2009)
PassMark	1,269	1,273
Geekbench 6 Single	341	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-4020 uses the FM2 socket (PCIe 3.0), 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 A4-4020 versus DDR2-667 on the Athlon X2 QL-60 — the A4-4020 supports 99.9% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A4-4020 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 (A4-4020) vs 0 (Athlon X2 QL-60) — the A4-4020 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: A55,A58,A68H,A75,A78,A88X (A4-4020) and AMD S1 (Athlon X2 QL-60).

Feature	A4-4020	Athlon X2 QL-60
Socket	FM2	S1
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	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 (A4-4020) / not specified (Athlon X2 QL-60). The A4-4020 includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 7480D), while the Athlon X2 QL-60 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-4020 targets Budget Desktop. Direct competitor: A4-4020 rivals Pentium G3220.