Athlon II X2 255 vs Turion 64 ML-28

Athlon II X2 255 vs Turion 64 ML-28 Performance Spectrum

Athlon II X2 255

2 / 2

1,210

+0.7%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Turion 64 ML-28

1 / 1

1,201

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

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 255 vs Turion 64 ML-28 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 255 vs Turion 64 ML-28: 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 255

2010

Why buy it

✅Draws 65W instead of 512W, a 447W reduction.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Stock), unlike Turion 64 ML-28.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $60 MSRP, while Turion 64 ML-28 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Turion 64 ML-28

2005

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,201 vs 1,210).
❌687.7% higher power demand at 512W vs 65W.
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Athlon II X2 255.

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon II X2 255 better than Turion 64 ML-28?

Yes. Athlon II X2 255 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 0.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.7% 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 255 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.5% 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 255 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.7% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Athlon II X2 255 is the better buy right now. Athlon II X2 255 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $60 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (20.2 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 255 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2010 vs 2005) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 2 threads instead of 1/1. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Athlon II X2 255 vs Turion 64 ML-28 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon II X2 255

The Athlon II X2 255 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 25 January 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Regor (2009−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.1 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,210 points. Launch price was $60.

Turion 64 ML-28

The Turion 64 ML-28 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Lancaster (2005−2006) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.6 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 90 nm process technology. Socket: 754. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,201 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Athlon II X2 255 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Turion 64 ML-28 offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the Athlon II X2 255 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 3.1 GHz on the Athlon II X2 255 versus 1.6 GHz on the Turion 64 ML-28 — a 63.8% clock advantage for the Athlon II X2 255. The Athlon II X2 255 uses the Regor (2009−2013) architecture (45 nm), while the Turion 64 ML-28 uses Lancaster (2005−2006) (90 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X2 255 scores 1,210 against the Turion 64 ML-28's 1,201 — a 0.7% lead for the Athlon II X2 255. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Athlon II X2 255	Turion 64 ML-28
Cores / Threads	2 / 2+100%	1 / 1
Boost Clock	3.1 GHz+94%	1.6 GHz
Base Clock	3.1 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB+100%	512 kB
Process	45 nm-50%	90 nm
Architecture	Regor (2009−2013)	Lancaster (2005−2006)
PassMark	1,210	1,201
Geekbench 6 Single	265	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	500	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon II X2 255 uses the AM3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Turion 64 ML-28 uses 754 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Athlon II X2 255	Turion 64 ML-28
Socket	AM3	754
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	—
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	Yes	—
PCIe Lanes	0	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: AMD-V (Athlon II X2 255) / not specified (Turion 64 ML-28). Primary use case: Athlon II X2 255 targets Legacy Desktop. Direct competitor: Athlon II X2 255 rivals Pentium E5700.