Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 vs Celeron B730

Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 vs Celeron B730 Performance Spectrum

Athlon 64 X2 TK-42

2 / 2

775

+8.4%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron B730

1 / 2

715

0.0%

Mobile Pentium 4 2.66

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 B730 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 B730: 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

✅Better for gaming: +6.9% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Costs $10 less on MSRP ($60 MSRP vs $70 MSRP).
✅Delivers 26.5% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 12.9 vs 10.2 PassMark/$ ($60 MSRP vs $70 MSRP).
✅Draws 1W instead of 35W, a 34W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron B730 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Celeron B730

2012

Why buy it

✅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

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (715 vs 775).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.2 vs 12.9 PassMark/$ ($70 MSRP vs $60 MSRP).
❌3400% higher power demand at 35W vs 1W.

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 better than Celeron B730?

Yes. Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 6.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data and 8.4% 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 X2 TK-42 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 6.9% 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 X2 TK-42 is the stronger fit. You are getting 8.4% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 is the better buy right now. Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 comes in $10 cheaper on MSRP at $60 MSRP versus $70 MSRP, and it still gives you a 6.9% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 26.5% better value on MSRP (12.9 vs 10.2 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Celeron B730 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2012 vs 2009). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 vs Celeron B730 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 B730

The Celeron B730 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 1 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.8 GHz. L3 cache: 1.5 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: G2. Thermal design power (TDP): 256 kB + 1.5 MB. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 715 points. Launch price was $70.

⚡

Processing Power

The Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Celeron B730 offers 1 cores / 2 threads — the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 1.6 GHz on the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 versus 1.8 GHz on the Celeron B730 — a 11.8% clock advantage for the Celeron B730. The Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 uses the Tyler (2007−2009) architecture (65 nm), while the Celeron B730 uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 scores 775 against the Celeron B730's 715 — a 8.1% lead for the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42.

Feature	Athlon 64 X2 TK-42	Celeron B730
Cores / Threads	2 / 2+100%	1 / 2
Boost Clock	1.6 GHz	1.8 GHz+12%
L3 Cache	—	1.5 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+8%	715

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 uses the S1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron B730 uses G2 (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 B730 — the Celeron B730 supports 99.9% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Celeron B730 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 B730) — the Celeron B730 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD S1 (Athlon 64 X2 TK-42) and HM65,HM67,QM67,QM77 (Celeron B730).

Feature	Athlon 64 X2 TK-42	Celeron B730
Socket	S1	G2
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 B730). The Celeron B730 includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron B730 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron B730 rivals Pentium 967.

Feature	Athlon 64 X2 TK-42	Celeron B730
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 B730 came in at $70. On launch pricing ($60 vs $70), Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 was $10 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 delivers 12.9 pts/$ vs 10.2 pts/$ for the Celeron B730 — making the Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 the 23.4% better value option.

Feature	Athlon 64 X2 TK-42	Celeron B730
MSRP	$60-14%	$70
Performance per Dollar	12.9+26%	10.2
Release Date	2009	2012

Search Athlon 64 X2 TK-42 on Amazon

Search Celeron B730 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.