Athlon II X4 640 vs Core i7-940XM

Athlon II X4 640 vs Core i7-940XM Performance Spectrum

Athlon II X4 640

4 / 4

2,266

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Core i7-940XM

4 / 8

2,269

+0.1%

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 X4 640 vs Core i7-940XM 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 X4 640 vs Core i7-940XM: 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 X4 640

2010

Why buy it

✅Costs $1,016 less on MSRP ($80 MSRP vs $1,096 MSRP).
✅Delivers 1268.2% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 28.3 vs 2.1 PassMark/$ ($80 MSRP vs $1,096 MSRP).
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i7-940XM.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,266 vs 2,269).
❌72.7% higher power demand at 95W vs 55W.

Core i7-940XM

2010

Why buy it

✅Draws 55W instead of 95W, a 40W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 2.1 vs 28.3 PassMark/$ ($1,096 MSRP vs $80 MSRP).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Athlon II X4 640.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-940XM better than Athlon II X4 640?

Yes. Core i7-940XM is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 0.1% 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, Core i7-940XM is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.1% 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, Core i7-940XM is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 8 threads.

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

Core i7-940XM is still the much better call for a fresh build. Core i7-940XM comes in 1270.0% more expensive on MSRP at $1,096 MSRP versus $80 MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. Athlon II X4 640 only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2010 platform. Even with 1268.2% better value on paper (28.3 vs 2.1 PassMark/$), 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?

Core i7-940XM makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 8 threads instead of 4/4. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Athlon II X4 640 vs Core i7-940XM Technical Specifications

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

Athlon II X4 640

The Athlon II X4 640 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 11 May 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Propus (2009−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,266 points. Launch price was $80.

Core i7-940XM

The Core i7-940XM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 June 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Clarksfield (2009−2010) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.13 GHz, with boost up to 3.33 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333. Passmark benchmark score: 2,269 points. Launch price was $1,096.

⚡

Processing Power

The Athlon II X4 640 packs 4 cores / 4 threads, matching the Core i7-940XM's 4 cores. Boost clocks reach 3 GHz on the Athlon II X4 640 versus 3.33 GHz on the Core i7-940XM — a 10.4% clock advantage for the Core i7-940XM (base: 3 GHz vs 2.13 GHz). The Athlon II X4 640 uses the Propus (2009−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Core i7-940XM uses Clarksfield (2009−2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon II X4 640 scores 2,266 against the Core i7-940XM's 2,269 — a 0.1% lead for the Core i7-940XM. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon II X4 640 vs 8 MB (total) on the Core i7-940XM.

Feature	Athlon II X4 640	Core i7-940XM
Cores / Threads	4 / 4	4 / 8
Boost Clock	3 GHz	3.33 GHz+11%
Base Clock	3 GHz+41%	2.13 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	8 MB (total)
L2 Cache	512 kB (per core)+100%	256 kB (per core)
Process	45 nm	45 nm
Architecture	Propus (2009−2011)	Clarksfield (2009−2010)
PassMark	2,266	2,269
Cinebench R23 Multi	1,471	—
Geekbench 6 Single	386	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	1,332	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon II X4 640 uses the AM3 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Core i7-940XM uses PGA988 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1333 memory speed. The Athlon II X4 640 supports up to 16 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 100% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: AM2+,AM3 (Athlon II X4 640) and PM55,HM55,QM57 (Core i7-940XM).

Feature	Athlon II X4 640	Core i7-940XM
Socket	AM3	PGA988
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1333	1333
Max RAM Capacity	16 GB+100%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Core i7-940XM has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: AMD-V (Athlon II X4 640) vs true (Core i7-940XM). Primary use case: Athlon II X4 640 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Athlon II X4 640 rivals Core 2 Quad Q8300; Core i7-940XM rivals Core i7-2720QM.

Feature	Athlon II X4 640	Core i7-940XM
Integrated GPU	No	No
IGPU Model	—	None
Unlocked	No	Yes
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	AMD-V	true
Target Use	Budget	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Athlon II X4 640 was priced at $80, while the Core i7-940XM came in at $1096. On launch pricing ($80 vs $1096), Athlon II X4 640 was $1016 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon II X4 640 delivers 28.3 pts/$ vs 2.1 pts/$ for the Core i7-940XM — making the Athlon II X4 640 the 172.8% better value option.

Feature	Athlon II X4 640	Core i7-940XM
MSRP	$80-93%	$1096
Performance per Dollar	28.3+1248%	2.1
Release Date	2010	2010

Search Athlon II X4 640 on Amazon

Search Core i7-940XM 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.