Athlon 64 FX-72
E2-9000
Athlon 64 FX-72 vs E2-9000 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 FX-72 vs E2-9000 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 FX-72 vs E2-9000: 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-72
2006Why buy it
Trade-offs
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $799 MSRP, while E2-9000 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
- ❌12400% higher power demand at 125W vs 1W.
E2-9000
2016Why buy it
- ✅Draws 1W instead of 125W, a 124W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (1,787 vs 1,794).
Quick Answers
So, is Athlon 64 FX-72 better than E2-9000?
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 FX-72 vs E2-9000 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
Athlon 64 FX-72
The Athlon 64 FX-72 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Windsor (2006−2007) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: F. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR1. Passmark benchmark score: 1,794 points. Launch price was $149.
E2-9000
The E2-9000 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.2 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: BGA. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 1,787 points. Launch price was $50.
Processing Power
Both the Athlon 64 FX-72 and E2-9000 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the Athlon 64 FX-72 versus 2.2 GHz on the E2-9000 — a 24% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 FX-72. The Athlon 64 FX-72 uses the Windsor (2006−2007) architecture (90 nm), while the E2-9000 uses Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 FX-72 scores 1,794 against the E2-9000's 1,787 — a 0.4% lead for the Athlon 64 FX-72.
| Feature | Athlon 64 FX-72 | E2-9000 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.8 GHz+27% | 2.2 GHz |
| Base Clock | — | 1.8 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | — |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
| Process | 90 nm | 28 nm-69% |
| Architecture | Windsor (2006−2007) | Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) |
| PassMark | 1,794 | 1,787 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon 64 FX-72 uses the F socket (PCIe 1.1), while the E2-9000 uses BGA (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Athlon 64 FX-72 | E2-9000 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | F | BGA |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 3.0+173% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-800 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | No | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | — |
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-72 and E2-9000
