Athlon 64 FX-51 vs Turion 64 ML-40

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.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Athlon 64 FX-51 is positioned at rank 1133 and the Turion 64 ML-40 is on rank 880, so the Turion 64 ML-40 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Athlon 64 FX-51

#1

Ryzen 9 7950X

MSRP: $194|Avg: $20

371089%

#2

Core i9-10900T

MSRP: $120|Avg: $5

350643%

#3

Ryzen 3 PRO 4355GE

MSRP: $423|Avg: $5

254595%

#4

Ryzen Threadripper 3960X

MSRP: $1399|Avg: $85

76699%

#5

Ryzen 9 9950X

MSRP: $649|Avg: $129

60754%

#6

Ryzen 5 8400F

MSRP: $303|Avg: $55

53148%

#7

Ryzen 7 PRO 2700

MSRP: $299|Avg: $60

30440%

#8

Ryzen 5 2600X

MSRP: $229|Avg: $55

30043%

#9

Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G

MSRP: $150|Avg: $60

27355%

#10

Core Ultra 5 245KF

MSRP: $294|Avg: $189

27352%

#11

Ryzen 5 5500

MSRP: $159|Avg: $85

27046%

#12

Ryzen 5 3600

MSRP: $199|Avg: $80

26317%

#13

Core i3-9100E

MSRP: $202|Avg: $30

25949%

#14

Core Ultra 5 245K

MSRP: $319|Avg: $200

25844%

#15

Core i3-8300T

MSRP: $138|Avg: $25

25610%

#1133

Athlon 64 FX-51

MSRP: $733|Avg: $733

100%

#1134

Athlon 64 FX-55

MSRP: $827|Avg: $50

99%

#1135

Athlon 64 FX-53

MSRP: $799|Avg: $15

96%

#1136

Athlon XP 2000+

MSRP: $339|Avg: $40

88%

#1137

Athlon 64 FX-57

MSRP: $1031|Avg: $200

83%

#1138

Athlon XP 3000+

MSRP: $588|Avg: $20

82%

#1139

Athlon XP 2100+

MSRP: $420|Avg: $30

75%

#1140

Pentium III 1266S

MSRP: $369|Avg: $20

68%

#1141

Pentium 4 1.80

MSRP: $562|Avg: $40

48%

#1142

Pentium III 1133

MSRP: $990|Avg: $30

21%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Turion 64 ML-40

#868

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

1467%

#869

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

1446%

#870

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

1327%

#871

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

1321%

#872

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

1309%

#874

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

1264%

#875

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

1212%

#876

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

1210%

#877

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

1178%

#880

Turion 64 ML-40

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#882

Celeron Dual-Core T1600

MSRP: $150|Avg: $150

100%

#884

Athlon II N330

MSRP: $100|Avg: $50

100%

#889

Core i7-7820EQ

MSRP: $378|Avg: $378

99%

#890

Celeron 7305

MSRP: $128|Avg: $107

98%

#891

E-300

MSRP: $60|Avg: $20

98%

#892

Core i7-7820HK

MSRP: $378|Avg: N/A

98%

#895

Pentium B940

MSRP: $134|Avg: $11

97%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Performance Analysis: Based on specifications, the Athlon 64 FX-51 shows stronger theoretical performance metrics.

Insight	Athlon 64 FX-51	Turion 64 ML-40
Gaming	Balanced gaming performance	Balanced gaming performance
Workstation	✅ Better multi-core power	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks
Price	⚠️ Higher cost ($733)	✅ More affordable ($0)
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (SledgeHammer (2003−2005) / 130 nm)	🛑 Legacy (Lancaster (2005−2006) / 90 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

Insight	Athlon 64 FX-51	Turion 64 ML-40
Cost Efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	⚠️ Higher cost ($733)	✅ More affordable ($0)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Athlon 64 FX-51 Benchmark Check

Turion 64 ML-40 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Athlon 64 FX-51 and Turion 64 ML-40

Athlon 64 FX-51

The Athlon 64 FX-51 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the SledgeHammer (2003−2005) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: 940. Thermal design power (TDP): 89 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 615 points. Launch price was $149.

Turion 64 ML-40

The Turion 64 ML-40 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Lancaster (2005−2006) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: 754. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 600 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon 64 FX-51 and Turion 64 ML-40 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.2 GHz on the Athlon 64 FX-51 versus 2.2 GHz on the Turion 64 ML-40 — identical boost frequencies. The Athlon 64 FX-51 uses the SledgeHammer (2003−2005) architecture (130 nm), while the Turion 64 ML-40 uses Lancaster (2005−2006) (90 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 FX-51 scores 615 against the Turion 64 ML-40's 600 — a 2.5% lead for the Athlon 64 FX-51. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Athlon 64 FX-51	Turion 64 ML-40
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	1 / 1
Boost Clock	2.2 GHz	2.2 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB
Process	130 nm	90 nm-31%
Architecture	SledgeHammer (2003−2005)	Lancaster (2005−2006)
PassMark	615+3%	600

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon 64 FX-51 uses the 940 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Turion 64 ML-40 uses 754 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.