A4-9120 vs Athlon II X2 255

CPU

GPU

A4-9120

2 Cores2 Thrd1 WWMax: 2.5 GHz2017

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Athlon II X2 255

2 Cores2 Thrd65 WWMax: 3.1 GHz2010

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

A4-9120 vs Athlon II X2 255 Performance Spectrum

A4-9120

2 / 2

1,222

+1.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Athlon II X2 255

2 / 2

1,210

0.0%

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.

A4-9120 vs Athlon II X2 255 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.

A4-9120 vs Athlon II X2 255: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

A4-9120

2017

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 1W instead of 65W, a 64W reduction.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (8 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R3, while Athlon II X2 255 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Athlon II X2 255.

Athlon II X2 255

2010

Why buy it

✅Includes a boxed cooler (Stock), unlike A4-9120.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than A4-9120 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (1,210 vs 1,222).
❌Launch MSRP is still $60 MSRP, while A4-9120 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌6400% higher power demand at 65W vs 1W.
❌No integrated graphics, while A4-9120 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is A4-9120 better than Athlon II X2 255?

Yes. A4-9120 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 3.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 1% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, A4-9120 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.1% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, A4-9120 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

A4-9120 is still the much better call for a fresh build. A4-9120 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $60 MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Athlon II X2 255 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2010 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (20.2 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on AM3.

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

A4-9120 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2017 vs 2010) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

A4-9120 vs Athlon II X2 255 Technical Specifications

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

A4-9120

The A4-9120 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.2 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: BGA. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,222 points. Launch price was $50.

Athlon II X2 255

The Athlon II X2 255 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 25 January 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Regor (2009−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.1 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: 1,210 points. Launch price was $60.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the A4-9120 and Athlon II X2 255 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the A4-9120 versus 3.1 GHz on the Athlon II X2 255 — a 21.4% clock advantage for the Athlon II X2 255 (base: 2.2 GHz vs 3.1 GHz). The A4-9120 uses the Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) architecture (28 nm), while the Athlon II X2 255 uses Regor (2009−2013) (45 nm). In PassMark, the A4-9120 scores 1,222 against the Athlon II X2 255's 1,210 — a 1% lead for the A4-9120. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 350 vs 265, a 27.6% lead for the A4-9120 that directly translates to higher frame rates.

Feature	A4-9120	Athlon II X2 255
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.5 GHz	3.1 GHz+24%
Base Clock	2.2 GHz	3.1 GHz+41%
L3 Cache	—	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB
Process	28 nm-38%	45 nm
Architecture	Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)	Regor (2009−2013)
PassMark	1,222	1,210
Geekbench 6 Single	350+32%	265
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	500

🧠

Memory & Platform

The A4-9120 uses the BGA socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Athlon II X2 255 uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR4-2133 on the A4-9120 versus DDR3-1333 on the Athlon II X2 255 — the A4-9120 supports 60% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon II X2 255 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (A4-9120) vs 2 (Athlon II X2 255). PCIe lanes: 8 (A4-9120) vs 0 (Athlon II X2 255) — the A4-9120 offers 8 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	A4-9120	Athlon II X2 255
Socket	BGA	AM3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR4-2133+60%	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	16 GB+100%
RAM Channels	1	2+100%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	8	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support AMD-V virtualization. The A4-9120 includes integrated graphics (Radeon R3), while the Athlon II X2 255 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: A4-9120 targets Entry Laptop, Athlon II X2 255 targets Legacy Desktop. Direct competitor: A4-9120 rivals Celeron N3350; Athlon II X2 255 rivals Pentium E5700.