Athlon II X2 270 vs Xeon L3110

Athlon II X2 270 vs Xeon L3110 Performance Spectrum

Athlon II X2 270

2 / 2

1,333

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Xeon L3110

1,338

+0.4%

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 270 vs Xeon L3110 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 270 vs Xeon L3110: 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 270

2011

Why buy it

✅Costs $928 less on MSRP ($72 MSRP vs $1,000 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1283.7% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 18.5 vs 1.3 PassMark/$ ($72 MSRP vs $1,000 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (true), unlike Xeon L3110.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,333 vs 1,338).
❌44.4% higher power demand at 65W vs 45W.

Xeon L3110

2009

Why buy it

✅Draws 45W instead of 65W, a 20W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 1.3 vs 18.5 PassMark/$ ($1,000 MSRP vs $72 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Athlon II X2 270.

Quick Answers

So, is Xeon L3110 better than Athlon II X2 270?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon L3110 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Athlon II X2 270 is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Xeon L3110 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 0.8% 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, Xeon L3110 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark.

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

Xeon L3110 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Xeon L3110 comes in 1288.9% more expensive on MSRP at $1,000 MSRP versus $72 MSRP, and it still gives you a 0.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Athlon II X2 270 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2011 platform. Even with 1283.7% better value on paper (18.5 vs 1.3 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on AM3.

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

Athlon II X2 270 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2009). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Athlon II X2 270 vs Xeon L3110 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon II X2 270

The Athlon II X2 270 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 1 July 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Regor (2009−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.4 GHz, with boost up to 3.4 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: DDR2, DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,333 points. Launch price was $100.

Xeon L3110

The Xeon L3110 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. Base frequency: 3 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB L2 Cache. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,338 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Athlon II X2 270 is built on the Regor (2009−2013) architecture. In PassMark, the Athlon II X2 270 scores 1,333 against the Xeon L3110's 1,338 — a 0.4% lead for the Xeon L3110. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon II X2 270 vs 6 MB L2 Cache on the Xeon L3110.

Feature	Athlon II X2 270	Xeon L3110
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	—
Boost Clock	3.4 GHz	—
Base Clock	3.4 GHz+13%	3 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	6 MB L2 Cache
L2 Cache	1 MB	—
Process	45 nm	45 nm
Architecture	Regor (2009−2013)	—
PassMark	1,333	1,338
Geekbench 6 Single	392	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	686	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon II X2 270 uses the AM3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Xeon L3110 uses LGA775 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Athlon II X2 270	Xeon L3110
Socket	AM3	LGA775
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	1333	—
Max RAM Capacity	16	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	0	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: true (Athlon II X2 270) / not specified (Xeon L3110). Direct competitor: Athlon II X2 270 rivals Pentium E6700.

Feature	Athlon II X2 270	Xeon L3110
Integrated GPU	No	—
IGPU Model	None	—
Unlocked	No	—
AVX-512	No	—
Virtualization	true	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Athlon II X2 270 was priced at $72, while the Xeon L3110 came in at $1000. On launch pricing ($72 vs $1000), Athlon II X2 270 was $928 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon II X2 270 delivers 18.5 pts/$ vs 1.3 pts/$ for the Xeon L3110 — making the Athlon II X2 270 the 173% better value option.

Feature	Athlon II X2 270	Xeon L3110
MSRP	$72-93%	$1000
Performance per Dollar	18.5+1323%	1.3
Release Date	2011	2009

Search Athlon II X2 270 on Amazon

Search Xeon L3110 on Amazon

Affiliate Disclosure

ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.

Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.