Athlon II X2 240 vs Celeron Dual-Core T1700
Athlon II X2 240
Celeron Dual-Core T1700
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 X2 240 is positioned at rank 852 and the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 is on rank 769, so the Celeron Dual-Core T1700 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 X2 240
Performance Per Dollar Celeron Dual-Core T1700
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon II X2 240 | Celeron Dual-Core T1700 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Regor (2009−2013) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Merom (2006−2008) / 65 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon II X2 240 | Celeron Dual-Core T1700 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($10) | ✅ 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 X2 240 and Celeron Dual-Core T1700
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 40% 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 — 120% 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+50% | DDR2-667 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB+300% | 4 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| 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.
| Feature | Athlon II X2 240 | Celeron Dual-Core T1700 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | None | — |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | No |
| Target Use | Desktop | Budget |
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 X2 240 and Celeron Dual-Core T1700
