Athlon II Neo K325 vs Core 2 Extreme X7900
Athlon II Neo K325
Core 2 Extreme X7900
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 II Neo K325 is positioned at rank 912 and the Core 2 Extreme X7900 is on rank 1162, so the Athlon II Neo K325 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Athlon II Neo K325
Performance Per Dollar Core 2 Extreme X7900
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon II Neo K325 | Core 2 Extreme X7900 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($25) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Geneva (2010) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Merom (2006−2008) / 65 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon II Neo K325 | Core 2 Extreme X7900 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($25) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
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 II Neo K325 and Core 2 Extreme X7900
Athlon II Neo K325
The Athlon II Neo K325 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Geneva (2010) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.3 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: S1. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,111 points. Launch price was $149.
Core 2 Extreme X7900
The Core 2 Extreme X7900 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2007 (18 years ago). It is based on the Merom (2006−2008) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.8 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 4 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 44 Watt. Memory support: DDR1. Passmark benchmark score: 1,115 points. Launch price was $851.
Processing Power
Both the Athlon II Neo K325 and Core 2 Extreme X7900 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.3 GHz on the Athlon II Neo K325 versus 2.8 GHz on the Core 2 Extreme X7900 — a 73.2% clock advantage for the Core 2 Extreme X7900. The Athlon II Neo K325 uses the Geneva (2010) architecture (45 nm), while the Core 2 Extreme X7900 uses Merom (2006−2008) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II Neo K325 scores 1,111 against the Core 2 Extreme X7900's 1,115 — a 0.4% lead for the Core 2 Extreme X7900.
| Feature | Athlon II Neo K325 | Core 2 Extreme X7900 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 1.3 GHz | 2.8 GHz+115% |
| Base Clock | — | 2.8 GHz |
| L3 Cache | — | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB | 4 MB+300% |
| Process | 45 nm-31% | 65 nm |
| Architecture | Geneva (2010) | Merom (2006−2008) |
| PassMark | 1,111 | 1,115 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 736 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 1,235 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon II Neo K325 uses the S1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core 2 Extreme X7900 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-800 on the Athlon II Neo K325 versus DDR2-667 on the Core 2 Extreme X7900 — the Athlon II Neo K325 supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon II Neo K325 supports up to 8 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 0 PCIe lanes.
| Feature | Athlon II Neo K325 | Core 2 Extreme X7900 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | S1 | PGA478 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0+82% | PCIe 1.1 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-800+50% | DDR2-667 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 GB+100% | 4 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Only the Core 2 Extreme X7900 has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: AMD-V (Athlon II Neo K325) vs VT-x (Core 2 Extreme X7900). Primary use case: Athlon II Neo K325 targets Low Power, Core 2 Extreme X7900 targets Mobile.
| Feature | Athlon II Neo K325 | Core 2 Extreme X7900 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | No | Yes |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | VT-x |
| Target Use | Low Power | Mobile |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Athlon II Neo K325 and Core 2 Extreme X7900
