Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 vs Celeron 877

CPU

GPU

Athlon 64 X2 TK-42

2 Cores2 Thrd1 WWMax: 1.6 GHz2009

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Celeron 877

2 Cores2 Thrd17 WWMax: 1.4 GHz2012

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 vs Celeron 877 Performance Spectrum

Athlon 64 X2 TK-42

2 / 2

775

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron 877

2 / 2

805

+3.9%

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 X2 TK-42 vs Celeron 877 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 X2 TK-42 vs Celeron 877: 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 X2 TK-42

2009

Why buy it

✅Costs $26 less on MSRP ($60 MSRP vs $86 MSRP).
✅Delivers 38.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 12.9 vs 9.4 PassMark/$ ($60 MSRP vs $86 MSRP).
✅Draws 1W instead of 17W, a 16W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Celeron 877 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (775 vs 805).
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron 877 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Celeron 877

2012

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +3.7% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge), while Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 9.4 vs 12.9 PassMark/$ ($86 MSRP vs $60 MSRP).
❌1600% higher power demand at 17W vs 1W.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron 877 better than Athlon 64 X2 TK-42?

Yes. Celeron 877 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 3.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 3.9% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Celeron 877 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 3.7% 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, Celeron 877 is the stronger fit. You are getting 3.9% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron 877 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Celeron 877 comes in 43.3% more expensive on MSRP at $86 MSRP versus $60 MSRP, and it still gives you a 3.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2009 platform. Even with 38.0% better value on paper (12.9 vs 9.4 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on S1.

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

Celeron 877 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2009) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 vs Celeron 877 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon 64 X2 TK-42

The Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Tyler (2007−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.6 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: S1. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 775 points. Launch price was $149.

Celeron 877

The Celeron 877 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 July 2012 (13 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.4 GHz, with boost up to 1.4 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 805 points. Launch price was $86.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 and Celeron 877 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.6 GHz on the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 versus 1.4 GHz on the Celeron 877 — a 13.3% clock advantage for the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42. The Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 uses the Tyler (2007−2009) architecture (65 nm), while the Celeron 877 uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 scores 775 against the Celeron 877's 805 — a 3.8% lead for the Celeron 877.

Feature	Athlon 64 X2 TK-42	Celeron 877
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.6 GHz+14%	1.4 GHz
Base Clock	—	1.4 GHz
L3 Cache	—	2 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB	256K (per core)+25500%
Process	65 nm	32 nm-51%
Architecture	Tyler (2007−2009)	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark	775	805+4%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 uses the S1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron 877 uses BGA1023 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-667 on the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 versus DDR3-1333 on the Celeron 877 — the Celeron 877 supports 99.9% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron 877 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon 64 X2 TK-42) vs 16 (Celeron 877) — the Celeron 877 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD S1 (Athlon 64 X2 TK-42) and HM65,HM67,HM75,HM76,HM77 (Celeron 877).

Feature	Athlon 64 X2 TK-42	Celeron 877
Socket	S1	BGA1023
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-667	DDR3-1333+100%
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	16 GB+100%
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	0	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Athlon 64 X2 TK-42) / VT-x (Celeron 877). The Celeron 877 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron 877 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 877 rivals Pentium 967.

Feature	Athlon 64 X2 TK-42	Celeron 877
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	—	HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)
Unlocked	—	No
AVX-512	—	No
Virtualization	—	VT-x
Target Use	—	Budget

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 was priced at $60, while the Celeron 877 came in at $86. On launch pricing ($60 vs $86), Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 was $26 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 delivers 12.9 pts/$ vs 9.4 pts/$ for the Celeron 877 — making the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 the 31.9% better value option.

Feature	Athlon 64 X2 TK-42	Celeron 877
MSRP	$60-30%	$86
Performance per Dollar	12.9+37%	9.4
Release Date	2009	2012

Search Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 on Amazon

Search Celeron 877 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.