Athlon II X4 615e vs Core M-5Y51
Athlon II X4 615e
Core M-5Y51
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 X4 615e is positioned at rank 983 and the Core M-5Y51 is on rank 1154, so the Athlon II X4 615e 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 X4 615e
Performance Per Dollar Core M-5Y51
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon II X4 615e | Core M-5Y51 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($30) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($281) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Propus (2009−2011) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Broadwell-Y (2014) / 14 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon II X4 615e | Core M-5Y51 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+831%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($30) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($281) |
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 X4 615e and Core M-5Y51
Athlon II X4 615e
The Athlon II X4 615e is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 21 September 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Propus (2009−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,018 points. Launch price was $59.
Core M-5Y51
The Core M-5Y51 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 27 October 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Broadwell-Y (2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.1 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1234. Thermal design power (TDP): 4.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,030 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
The Athlon II X4 615e packs 4 cores / 4 threads, while the Core M-5Y51 offers 2 cores / 4 threads — the Athlon II X4 615e has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the Athlon II X4 615e versus 2.6 GHz on the Core M-5Y51 — a 3.9% clock advantage for the Core M-5Y51 (base: 2.5 GHz vs 1.1 GHz). The Athlon II X4 615e uses the Propus (2009−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Core M-5Y51 uses Broadwell-Y (2014) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X4 615e scores 2,018 against the Core M-5Y51's 2,030 — a 0.6% lead for the Core M-5Y51. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon II X4 615e vs 4 MB (total) on the Core M-5Y51.
| Feature | Athlon II X4 615e | Core M-5Y51 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 4 / 4+100% | 2 / 4 |
| Boost Clock | 2.5 GHz | 2.6 GHz+4% |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz+127% | 1.1 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 4 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB (per core)+100% | 256K (per core) |
| Process | 45 nm | 14 nm-69% |
| Architecture | Propus (2009−2011) | Broadwell-Y (2014) |
| PassMark | 2,018 | 2,030 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | 1,161 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 331 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 1,161 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon II X4 615e uses the AM3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core M-5Y51 uses FCBGA1234 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Athlon II X4 615e | Core M-5Y51 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | AM3 | FCBGA1234 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 3.0+50% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1333 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 16 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 2 | — |
| ECC Support | ❌ | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | — |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: AMD-V (Athlon II X4 615e) / not specified (Core M-5Y51). Primary use case: Athlon II X4 615e targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Athlon II X4 615e rivals Intel Core 2 Quad Q8300.
| Feature | Athlon II X4 615e | Core M-5Y51 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | — |
| Unlocked | Yes | — |
| AVX-512 | No | — |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | — |
| Target Use | Gaming | — |
Value Analysis
The Athlon II X4 615e launched at $186 MSRP, while the Core M-5Y51 debuted at $281. At current prices ($30 vs $281), the Athlon II X4 615e is $251 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon II X4 615e delivers 67.3 pts/$ vs 7.2 pts/$ for the Core M-5Y51 — making the Athlon II X4 615e the 161.2% better value option.
| Feature | Athlon II X4 615e | Core M-5Y51 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $186-34% | $281 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $30-89% | $281 |
| Performance per Dollar | 67.3+835% | 7.2 |
| Release Date | 2010 | 2014 |
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 X4 615e and Core M-5Y51
