Athlon II X2 240 vs Celeron B840

CPU

GPU

Athlon II X2 240

2 Cores2 Thrd65 WWMax: 2.8 GHz2009

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Celeron B840

2 Cores2 Thrd0 WWMax: 1.9 GHz2011

Similar parts

·······

Buy on Amazon

Athlon II X2 240 vs Celeron B840 Performance Spectrum

Athlon II X2 240

2 / 2

1,060

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron B840

2 / 2

1,065

+0.5%

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 II X2 240 vs Celeron B840 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 II X2 240 vs Celeron B840: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Athlon II X2 240

2009

Why buy it

✅Costs $26 less on MSRP ($60 MSRP vs $86 MSRP).
✅Delivers 42.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 17.7 vs 12.4 PassMark/$ ($60 MSRP vs $86 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (AMD Stock), unlike Celeron B840.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Geekbench single-core performance for gaming (373 vs 450).
❌Lower Geekbench multi-core (700 vs 790).
❌No integrated graphics, while Celeron B840 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Celeron B840

2011

Why buy it

✅+20.6% higher Geekbench single-core performance for gaming and desktop responsiveness.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge), while Athlon II X2 240 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.4 vs 17.7 PassMark/$ ($86 MSRP vs $60 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Athlon II X2 240.

Quick Answers

So, is Celeron B840 better than Athlon II X2 240?

Yes. Celeron B840 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, 12.9% better Geekbench multi-core, 0.5% higher 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 B840 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, Celeron B840 is the stronger fit. You are getting 12.9% better Geekbench multi-core, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Celeron B840 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Celeron B840 comes in 43.3% more expensive on MSRP at $86 MSRP versus $60 MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Athlon II X2 240 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2009 platform. Even with 42.7% better value on paper (17.7 vs 12.4 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on AM3.

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

Celeron B840 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 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 II X2 240 vs Celeron B840 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon II X2 240

The Athlon II X2 240 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 23 July 2009 (16 years ago). It is based on the Regor (2009−2013) 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: 2 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,060 points. Launch price was $35.

Celeron B840

The Celeron B840 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 July 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.9 GHz, with boost up to 1.9 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,065 points. Launch price was $86.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon II X2 240 and Celeron B840 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the Athlon II X2 240 versus 1.9 GHz on the Celeron B840 — a 38.3% clock advantage for the Athlon II X2 240 (base: 2.8 GHz vs 1.9 GHz). The Athlon II X2 240 uses the Regor (2009−2013) architecture (45 nm), while the Celeron B840 uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X2 240 scores 1,060 against the Celeron B840's 1,065 — a 0.5% lead for the Celeron B840. Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 373 vs 450, a 18.7% lead for the Celeron B840 that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 700 vs 790 (12.1% advantage for the Celeron B840). L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon II X2 240 vs 2 MB (total) on the Celeron B840.

Feature	Athlon II X2 240	Celeron B840
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.8 GHz+47%	1.9 GHz
Base Clock	2.8 GHz+47%	1.9 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	2 MB (total)
L2 Cache	2 MB	256K (per core)+12700%
Process	45 nm	32 nm-29%
Architecture	Regor (2009−2013)	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark	1,060	1,065
Geekbench 6 Single	373	450+21%
Geekbench 6 Multi	700	790+13%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon II X2 240 uses the AM3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron B840 uses PGA988 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1066 on the Athlon II X2 240 versus 1333 on the Celeron B840 — the Celeron B840 supports 25% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 16 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: 760G,785G,790GX,880G,890GX (Athlon II X2 240) and HM65,HM67,QM67 (Celeron B840).

Feature	Athlon II X2 240	Celeron B840
Socket	AM3	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1066	1333+25%
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	16 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (Athlon II X2 240) vs true (Celeron B840). The Celeron B840 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)), while the Athlon II X2 240 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Athlon II X2 240 targets Desktop, Celeron B840 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Athlon II X2 240 rivals Pentium E5400; Celeron B840 rivals Pentium B940.

Feature	Athlon II X2 240	Celeron B840
Integrated GPU	No	Yes
IGPU Model	None	Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge)
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	AMD-V	true
Target Use	Desktop	Budget

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Athlon II X2 240 was priced at $60, while the Celeron B840 came in at $86. On launch pricing ($60 vs $86), Athlon II X2 240 was $26 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon II X2 240 delivers 17.7 pts/$ vs 12.4 pts/$ for the Celeron B840 — making the Athlon II X2 240 the 35.2% better value option.

Feature	Athlon II X2 240	Celeron B840
MSRP	$60-30%	$86
Performance per Dollar	17.7+43%	12.4
Release Date	2009	2011

Search Athlon II X2 240 on Amazon

Search Celeron B840 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.