Athlon II X2 260 vs Turion II Neo K625

Athlon II X2 260 vs Turion II Neo K625 Performance Spectrum

Athlon II X2 260

2 / 2

1,248

+0.6%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Turion II Neo K625

2 / 2

1,241

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 260 vs Turion II Neo K625 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 260 vs Turion II Neo K625: 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 260

2010

Why buy it

✅Includes a boxed cooler (true), unlike Turion II Neo K625.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $60 MSRP, while Turion II Neo K625 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌6400% higher power demand at 65W vs 1W.

Turion II Neo K625

2010

Why buy it

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

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,241 vs 1,248).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Athlon II X2 260.

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon II X2 260 better than Turion II Neo K625?

Yes. Athlon II X2 260 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, 0.6% 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 260 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 260 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Athlon II X2 260 is the better buy right now. Athlon II X2 260 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $60 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (20.8 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 260 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting 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 260 vs Turion II Neo K625 Technical Specifications

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

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.

Turion II Neo K625

The Turion II Neo K625 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Geneva (2010) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.5 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: S1. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,241 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon II X2 260 and Turion II Neo K625 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.2 GHz on the Athlon II X2 260 versus 1.5 GHz on the Turion II Neo K625 — a 72.3% clock advantage for the Athlon II X2 260. The Athlon II X2 260 uses the Regor (2009−2013) architecture (45 nm), while the Turion II Neo K625 uses Geneva (2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X2 260 scores 1,248 against the Turion II Neo K625's 1,241 — a 0.6% lead for the Athlon II X2 260.

Feature	Athlon II X2 260	Turion II Neo K625
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	3.2 GHz+113%	1.5 GHz
Base Clock	3.2 GHz	—
L3 Cache	0 kB	—
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB
Process	45 nm	45 nm
Architecture	Regor (2009−2013)	Geneva (2010)
PassMark	1,248	1,241

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon II X2 260 uses the AM3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Turion II Neo K625 uses S1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.