Athlon 64 2000+
E-240
Athlon 64 2000+ vs E-240 Performance Spectrum
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 64 2000+ vs E-240 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.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Among Us
Apex Legends
ARC Raiders
Baldur's Gate 3
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
Athlon 64 2000+ vs E-240: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict
See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.
Athlon 64 2000+
2008Why buy it
- ✅Draws 8W instead of 512W, a 504W reduction.
- ✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (330 vs 338).
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $100 MSRP, while E-240 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
E-240
2011Why buy it
Trade-offs
- ❌6300% higher power demand at 512W vs 8W.
Quick Answers
So, is E-240 better than Athlon 64 2000+?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Athlon 64 2000+ vs E-240 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
Athlon 64 2000+
The Athlon 64 2000+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Lima (2008−2009) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: AM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 8 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 330 points. Launch price was $149.
E-240
The E-240 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 4 January 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Zacate (2011−2013) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 40 nm process technology. Socket: FT1. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB. Memory support: DDR3 Single-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 338 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
Both the Athlon 64 2000+ and E-240 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1 GHz on the Athlon 64 2000+ versus 1.5 GHz on the E-240 — a 40% clock advantage for the E-240. The Athlon 64 2000+ uses the Lima (2008−2009) architecture (65 nm), while the E-240 uses Zacate (2011−2013) (40 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 2000+ scores 330 against the E-240's 338 — a 2.4% lead for the E-240. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Athlon 64 2000+ | E-240 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 1 GHz | 1.5 GHz+50% |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB | 512 kB |
| Process | 65 nm | 40 nm-38% |
| Architecture | Lima (2008−2009) | Zacate (2011−2013) |
| PassMark | 330 | 338+2% |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon 64 2000+ uses the AM2 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the E-240 uses FT1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Athlon 64 2000+ | E-240 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | AM2 | FT1 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-400 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | No | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Athlon 64 2000+ and E-240
