A4-4355M vs Athlon X2 QL-66

A4-4355M vs Athlon X2 QL-66 Performance Spectrum

A4-4355M

2 / 2

1,690

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Athlon X2 QL-66

2 / 2

1,695

+0.3%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

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.

A4-4355M vs Athlon X2 QL-66 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.

A4-4355M vs Athlon X2 QL-66: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A4-4355M

2012

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon HD 7400G, while Athlon X2 QL-66 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,690 vs 1,695).
❌1600% higher power demand at 17W vs 1W.

Athlon X2 QL-66

2009

Why buy it

✅+0.3% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 1W instead of 17W, a 16W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $150 MSRP, while A4-4355M mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌No integrated graphics, while A4-4355M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon X2 QL-66 better than A4-4355M?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, A4-4355M is ahead with a 0.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Athlon X2 QL-66 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-66 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-66 is the better buy right now. Athlon X2 QL-66 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $150 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.3% better PassMark. The compromise is that A4-4355M is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 0.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (11.3 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

A4-4355M makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2009). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

A4-4355M vs Athlon X2 QL-66 Technical Specifications

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

A4-4355M

The A4-4355M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.9 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB (total). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FP2. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: unknown Dual-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 1,690 points. Launch price was $50.

Athlon X2 QL-66

The Athlon X2 QL-66 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: 2.2 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: S1g2. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,695 points. Launch price was $149.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A4-4355M and Athlon X2 QL-66 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the A4-4355M versus 2.2 GHz on the Athlon X2 QL-66 — a 8.7% clock advantage for the A4-4355M. The A4-4355M uses the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the Athlon X2 QL-66 uses Lion (2008−2009) (65 nm). In PassMark, the A4-4355M scores 1,690 against the Athlon X2 QL-66's 1,695 — a 0.3% lead for the Athlon X2 QL-66.

Feature	A4-4355M	Athlon X2 QL-66
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.4 GHz+9%	2.2 GHz
Base Clock	1.9 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	—
L2 Cache	1 MB (total)	1 MB
Process	32 nm-51%	65 nm
Architecture	Trinity (2012−2013)	Lion (2008−2009)
PassMark	1,690	1,695
Geekbench 6 Single	239	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-4355M uses the FP2 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Athlon X2 QL-66 uses S1g2 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1333 on the A4-4355M versus DDR2-667 on the Athlon X2 QL-66 — the A4-4355M supports 99.9% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The A4-4355M 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 (A4-4355M) vs 0 (Athlon X2 QL-66) — the A4-4355M offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A4-4355M	Athlon X2 QL-66
Socket	FP2	S1g2
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 (A4-4355M) / not specified (Athlon X2 QL-66). The A4-4355M includes integrated graphics (Radeon HD 7400G), while the Athlon X2 QL-66 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-4355M targets Ultrathin Laptop. Direct competitor: A4-4355M rivals Pentium 2117U.