CPU
GPU
Athlon II X2 260
Athlon 64 TF-20
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 260 is positioned at rank 780 and the Athlon 64 TF-20 is on rank 790, so the Athlon II X2 260 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 260
Performance Per Dollar Athlon 64 TF-20
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon II X2 260 | Athlon 64 TF-20 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($12) | ✅ More affordable ($10) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Regor (2009−2013) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Sherman (2009) / 65 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon II X2 260 | Athlon 64 TF-20 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+20%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($12) | ✅ More affordable ($10) |
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.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Athlon II X2 260 and Athlon 64 TF-20
Athlon II X2 260
The Athlon II X2 260 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 11 May 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Regor (2009−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 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: 1,248 points. Launch price was $48.
Athlon 64 TF-20
The Athlon 64 TF-20 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Sherman (2009) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.6 GHz. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: S1g1. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,245 points. Launch price was $149.
Processing Power
The Athlon II X2 260 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Athlon 64 TF-20 offers 1 cores / 1 threads — the Athlon II X2 260 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 3.2 GHz on the Athlon II X2 260 versus 1.6 GHz on the Athlon 64 TF-20 — a 66.7% clock advantage for the Athlon II X2 260. The Athlon II X2 260 uses the Regor (2009−2013) architecture (45 nm), while the Athlon 64 TF-20 uses Sherman (2009) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X2 260 scores 1,248 against the Athlon 64 TF-20's 1,245 — a 0.2% lead for the Athlon II X2 260.
| Feature | Athlon II X2 260 | Athlon 64 TF-20 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2+100% | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 3.2 GHz+100% | 1.6 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.2 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | — |
| L2 Cache | 1 MB+100% | 512 kB |
| Process | 45 nm-31% | 65 nm |
| Architecture | Regor (2009−2013) | Sherman (2009) |
| PassMark | 1,248 | 1,245 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon II X2 260 uses the AM3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Athlon 64 TF-20 uses S1g1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1333 on the Athlon II X2 260 versus DDR2-667 on the Athlon 64 TF-20 — the Athlon II X2 260 supports 199.4% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon II X2 260 supports up to 16 of RAM compared to 4 GB — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Chipset compatibility: AM2+,AM3 (Athlon II X2 260) and Socket S1 (Athlon 64 TF-20).
| Feature | Athlon II X2 260 | Athlon 64 TF-20 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | AM3 | S1g1 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | 1333+66550% | DDR2-667 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 | 4 GB+26214300% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | — |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: true (Athlon II X2 260) vs false (Athlon 64 TF-20). Direct competitor: Athlon II X2 260 rivals Pentium E6700.
| Feature | Athlon II X2 260 | Athlon 64 TF-20 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | None | — |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | true | false |
Value Analysis
The Athlon II X2 260 launched at $60 MSRP, while the Athlon 64 TF-20 debuted at $50. At current prices ($12 vs $10), the Athlon 64 TF-20 is $2 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon II X2 260 delivers 104.0 pts/$ vs 124.5 pts/$ for the Athlon 64 TF-20 — making the Athlon 64 TF-20 the 17.9% better value option.
| Feature | Athlon II X2 260 | Athlon 64 TF-20 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $60 | $50-17% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $12 | $10-17% |
| Performance per Dollar | 104.0 | 124.5+20% |
| Release Date | 2010 | 2009 |
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 260 and Athlon 64 TF-20
