Athlon 64 FX-60 vs Athlon II X2 255
Athlon 64 FX-60
Athlon II X2 255
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
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-60 is positioned at rank 1119 and the Athlon II X2 255 is on rank 793, so the Athlon II X2 255 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Athlon 64 FX-60
Performance Per Dollar Athlon II X2 255
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon 64 FX-60 | Athlon II X2 255 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($1,000) | ✅ More affordable ($10) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Toledo (2006) / 90 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Regor (2009−2013) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon 64 FX-60 | Athlon II X2 255 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+9941%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($1,000) | ✅ More affordable ($10) |
Performance Check
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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Athlon 64 FX-60 and Athlon II X2 255
Athlon 64 FX-60
The Athlon 64 FX-60 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Toledo (2006) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: 939. Thermal design power (TDP): 110 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,205 points. Launch price was $149.
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 Athlon 64 FX-60 and Athlon II X2 255 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Athlon 64 FX-60 versus 3.1 GHz on the Athlon II X2 255 — a 17.5% clock advantage for the Athlon II X2 255. The Athlon 64 FX-60 uses the Toledo (2006) architecture (90 nm), while the Athlon II X2 255 uses Regor (2009−2013) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 FX-60 scores 1,205 against the Athlon II X2 255's 1,210 — a 0.4% lead for the Athlon II X2 255. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 250 vs 265, a 5.8% lead for the Athlon II X2 255 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 480 vs 500 (4.1% advantage for the Athlon II X2 255). Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Athlon 64 FX-60 | Athlon II X2 255 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.6 GHz | 3.1 GHz+19% |
| Base Clock | — | 3.1 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 2 MB+100% | 1 MB |
| Process | 90 nm | 45 nm-50% |
| Architecture | Toledo (2006) | Regor (2009−2013) |
| PassMark | 1,205 | 1,210 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 250 | 265+6% |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 480 | 500+4% |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon 64 FX-60 uses the 939 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Athlon II X2 255 uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR-400 on the Athlon 64 FX-60 versus DDR3-1333 on the Athlon II X2 255 — the Athlon II X2 255 supports -203% 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 4 GB — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 0 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: nForce4,K8T890 (Athlon 64 FX-60) and 760G,780G,785G,790GX,870,880G,890GX,890FX (Athlon II X2 255).
| Feature | Athlon 64 FX-60 | Athlon II X2 255 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | 939 | AM3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR-400 | DDR3-1333 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB | 16 GB+300% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ✅ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Only the Athlon 64 FX-60 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: None (Athlon 64 FX-60) vs AMD-V (Athlon II X2 255). Primary use case: Athlon 64 FX-60 targets Gaming/Enthusiast, Athlon II X2 255 targets Legacy Desktop. Direct competitor: Athlon II X2 255 rivals Pentium E5700.
| Feature | Athlon 64 FX-60 | Athlon II X2 255 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | Yes | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | None | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Gaming/Enthusiast | Legacy Desktop |
Value Analysis
The Athlon 64 FX-60 launched at $1031 MSRP, while the Athlon II X2 255 debuted at $60. At current prices ($1000 vs $10), the Athlon II X2 255 is $990 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon 64 FX-60 delivers 1.2 pts/$ vs 121.0 pts/$ for the Athlon II X2 255 — making the Athlon II X2 255 the 196.1% better value option.
| Feature | Athlon 64 FX-60 | Athlon II X2 255 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $1031 | $60-94% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $1000 | $10-99% |
| Performance per Dollar | 1.2 | 121.0+9983% |
| Release Date | 2006 | 2010 |
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 FX-60 and Athlon II X2 255
