Athlon II X2 240 vs Celeron Dual-Core T1700

Athlon II X2 240 vs Celeron Dual-Core T1700 Performance Spectrum

Athlon II X2 240

2 / 2

1,060

+0.2%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Celeron Dual-Core T1700

2 / 2

1,058

0.0%

Core Duo T2050

Celeron N3000

Celeron J1800

Pentium Dual-Core E2180

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 Dual-Core T1700 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 Dual-Core T1700: 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

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (AMD Stock), unlike Celeron Dual-Core T1700.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $60 MSRP, while Celeron Dual-Core T1700 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌6400% higher power demand at 65W vs 1W.

Celeron Dual-Core T1700

2008

Why buy it

✅Draws 1W instead of 65W, a 64W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,058 vs 1,060).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Athlon II X2 240.

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon II X2 240 better than Celeron Dual-Core T1700?

Yes. Athlon II X2 240 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.2% 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, Athlon II X2 240 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.1% 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 II X2 240 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.2% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Athlon II X2 240 is the better buy right now. Athlon II X2 240 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $60 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (17.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Athlon II X2 240 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2009 vs 2008) 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 Dual-Core T1700 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 Dual-Core T1700

The Celeron Dual-Core T1700 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Merom (2006−2008) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.83 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,058 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon II X2 240 and Celeron Dual-Core T1700 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.8 GHz on the Athlon II X2 240 versus 1.83 GHz on the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 — a 41.9% clock advantage for the Athlon II X2 240. The Athlon II X2 240 uses the Regor (2009−2013) architecture (45 nm), while the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 uses Merom (2006−2008) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X2 240 scores 1,060 against the Celeron Dual-Core T1700's 1,058 — a 0.2% lead for the Athlon II X2 240.

Feature	Athlon II X2 240	Celeron Dual-Core T1700
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.8 GHz+53%	1.83 GHz
Base Clock	2.8 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	—
L2 Cache	2 MB+100%	1 MB
Process	45 nm-31%	65 nm
Architecture	Regor (2009−2013)	Merom (2006−2008)
PassMark	1,060	1,058
Geekbench 6 Single	373	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	700	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon II X2 240 uses the AM3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 uses PGA478 (PCIe 1.1) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1066 on the Athlon II X2 240 versus DDR2-667 on the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 — the Athlon II X2 240 supports 59.8% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon II X2 240 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Athlon II X2 240) vs 0 (Celeron Dual-Core T1700) — the Athlon II X2 240 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: 760G,785G,790GX,880G,890GX (Athlon II X2 240) and GL40,GM45 (Celeron Dual-Core T1700).

Feature	Athlon II X2 240	Celeron Dual-Core T1700
Socket	AM3	PGA478
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0+82%	PCIe 1.1
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1066+60%	DDR2-667
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+300%	4 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (Athlon II X2 240) vs No (Celeron Dual-Core T1700). Primary use case: Athlon II X2 240 targets Desktop, Celeron Dual-Core T1700 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Athlon II X2 240 rivals Pentium E5400; Celeron Dual-Core T1700 rivals Pentium T2390.