Athlon 64 FX-60 vs Core 2 Duo T9900

Athlon 64 FX-60 vs Core 2 Duo T9900 Performance Spectrum

Athlon 64 FX-60

2 / 2

1,205

+0.1%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core 2 Duo T9900

2 / 2

1,204

0.0%

Atom E3827

Celeron 877

Pentium Dual-Core E2180

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 FX-60 vs Core 2 Duo T9900 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 64 FX-60 vs Core 2 Duo T9900: 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 FX-60

2006

Why buy it

✅Includes a boxed cooler (Stock Cooler), unlike Core 2 Duo T9900.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $1,031 MSRP, while Core 2 Duo T9900 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌214.3% higher power demand at 110W vs 35W.

Core 2 Duo T9900

2009

Why buy it

✅Draws 35W instead of 110W, a 75W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,204 vs 1,205).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Athlon 64 FX-60.

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon 64 FX-60 better than Core 2 Duo T9900?

Yes. Athlon 64 FX-60 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 0.1% better PassMark, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Athlon 64 FX-60 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.0% 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, Athlon 64 FX-60 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Athlon 64 FX-60 is the better buy right now. Athlon 64 FX-60 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $1,031 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (1.2 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Core 2 Duo T9900 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2009 vs 2006). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Athlon 64 FX-60 vs Core 2 Duo T9900 Technical Specifications

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

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.

Core 2 Duo T9900

The Core 2 Duo T9900 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2 June 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.06 GHz, with boost up to 0.07 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB L2 Cache. L2 cache: 6 MB (total). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,204 points. Launch price was $530.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon 64 FX-60 and Core 2 Duo T9900 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Athlon 64 FX-60 versus 0.07 GHz on the Core 2 Duo T9900 — a 189.5% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 FX-60. The Athlon 64 FX-60 uses the Toledo (2006) architecture (90 nm), while the Core 2 Duo T9900 uses Penryn (2008−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 FX-60 scores 1,205 against the Core 2 Duo T9900's 1,204 — a 0.1% lead for the Athlon 64 FX-60. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon 64 FX-60 vs 6 MB L2 Cache on the Core 2 Duo T9900.

Feature	Athlon 64 FX-60	Core 2 Duo T9900
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.6 GHz+3614%	0.07 GHz
Base Clock	—	3.06 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	6 MB L2 Cache
L2 Cache	2 MB	6 MB (total)+200%
Process	90 nm	45 nm-50%
Architecture	Toledo (2006)	Penryn (2008−2011)
PassMark	1,205	1,204
Geekbench 6 Single	250	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	480	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon 64 FX-60 uses the 939 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Core 2 Duo T9900 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Athlon 64 FX-60	Core 2 Duo T9900
Socket	939	PGA478
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR-400	—
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	0	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: None (Athlon 64 FX-60) / not specified (Core 2 Duo T9900). Primary use case: Athlon 64 FX-60 targets Gaming/Enthusiast.