Athlon 5150 vs Turion II Neo K685

Athlon 5150 vs Turion II Neo K685 Performance Spectrum

Athlon 5150

4 / 4

1,415

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Turion II Neo K685

2 / 2

1,424

+0.6%

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.

Athlon 5150 vs Turion II Neo K685 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.

Athlon 5150 vs Turion II Neo K685: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Athlon 5150

2014

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (4 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Radeon R3 Graphics, while Turion II Neo K685 needs a discrete GPU.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (true), unlike Turion II Neo K685.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,415 vs 1,424).
❌Launch MSRP is still $21 MSRP, while Turion II Neo K685 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌2400% higher power demand at 25W vs 1W.

Turion II Neo K685

2010

Why buy it

✅Draws 1W instead of 25W, a 24W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌No integrated graphics, while Athlon 5150 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Athlon 5150.

Quick Answers

So, is Turion II Neo K685 better than Athlon 5150?

Yes. Turion II Neo K685 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.6% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Turion II Neo K685 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.3% 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, Turion II Neo K685 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Turion II Neo K685 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Turion II Neo K685 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $21 MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Athlon 5150 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2014 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (67.4 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on AM1.

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

Athlon 5150 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2014 vs 2010). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Athlon 5150 vs Turion II Neo K685 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon 5150

The Athlon 5150 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Kabini (2013−2014) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Max frequency: 1.6 GHz. L2 cache: 2048 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: AM1. Thermal design power (TDP): 25 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 1,415 points. Launch price was $149.

Turion II Neo K685

The Turion II Neo K685 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Geneva (2010) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.8 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: S1g4. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,424 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Athlon 5150 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Turion II Neo K685 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Athlon 5150 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.6 GHz on the Athlon 5150 versus 1.8 GHz on the Turion II Neo K685 — a 11.8% clock advantage for the Turion II Neo K685. The Athlon 5150 uses the Kabini (2013−2014) architecture (28 nm), while the Turion II Neo K685 uses Geneva (2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 5150 scores 1,415 against the Turion II Neo K685's 1,424 — a 0.6% lead for the Turion II Neo K685.

Feature	Athlon 5150	Turion II Neo K685
Cores / Threads	4 / 4+100%	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.6 GHz	1.8 GHz+12%
L2 Cache	2048 kB+100%	1 MB
Process	28 nm-38%	45 nm
Architecture	Kabini (2013−2014)	Geneva (2010)
PassMark	1,415	1,424

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon 5150 uses the AM1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Turion II Neo K685 uses S1g4 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Athlon 5150	Turion II Neo K685
Socket	AM1	S1g4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	1600	—
Max RAM Capacity	16	—
RAM Channels	1	—
ECC Support	Yes	—
PCIe Lanes	4	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: true (Athlon 5150) / not specified (Turion II Neo K685). The Athlon 5150 includes integrated graphics (Radeon R3 Graphics), while the Turion II Neo K685 requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Athlon 5150 rivals Pentium J2900.