Athlon Neo X2 L335 vs Athlon X2 340
Athlon Neo X2 L335
Athlon X2 340
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 Neo X2 L335 is positioned at rank 944 and the Athlon X2 340 is on rank 462, so the Athlon X2 340 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Athlon Neo X2 L335
Performance Per Dollar Athlon X2 340
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Athlon Neo X2 L335 | Athlon X2 340 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Congo (2009) / 65 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Trinity (2012−2013) / 32 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Athlon Neo X2 L335 | Athlon X2 340 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+0%) |
| Upfront Cost | Equivalent pricing | Equivalent pricing |
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 Neo X2 L335 and Athlon X2 340
Athlon Neo X2 L335
The Athlon Neo X2 L335 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Congo (2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.6 GHz. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: ASB1. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB. Memory support: DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 1,331 points. Launch price was $149.
Athlon X2 340
The Athlon X2 340 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.6 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB (total). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 1,333 points. Launch price was $149.
Processing Power
Both the Athlon Neo X2 L335 and Athlon X2 340 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.6 GHz on the Athlon Neo X2 L335 versus 3.6 GHz on the Athlon X2 340 — a 76.9% clock advantage for the Athlon X2 340. The Athlon Neo X2 L335 uses the Congo (2009) architecture (65 nm), while the Athlon X2 340 uses Trinity (2012−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon Neo X2 L335 scores 1,331 against the Athlon X2 340's 1,333 — a 0.2% lead for the Athlon X2 340.
| Feature | Athlon Neo X2 L335 | Athlon X2 340 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 1.6 GHz | 3.6 GHz+125% |
| Base Clock | — | 3.2 GHz |
| L2 Cache | 512 kB | 1 MB (total)+100% |
| Process | 65 nm | 32 nm-51% |
| Architecture | Congo (2009) | Trinity (2012−2013) |
| PassMark | 1,331 | 1,333 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 397 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 549 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon Neo X2 L335 uses the ASB1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Athlon X2 340 uses FM2 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-800 on the Athlon Neo X2 L335 versus DDR3-1600 on the Athlon X2 340 — the Athlon X2 340 supports 40% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon X2 340 supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 4 GB — 155.6% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 0 (Athlon Neo X2 L335) vs 16 (Athlon X2 340) — the Athlon X2 340 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: AMD ASB1 (Athlon Neo X2 L335) and A55,A75,A85X,A88X (Athlon X2 340).
| Feature | Athlon Neo X2 L335 | Athlon X2 340 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | ASB1 | FM2 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-800 | DDR3-1600+50% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB | 32 GB+700% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Athlon Neo X2 L335) / AMD-V (Athlon X2 340). Primary use case: Athlon X2 340 targets Desktop.
| Feature | Athlon Neo X2 L335 | Athlon X2 340 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| Unlocked | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | AMD-V |
| Target Use | — | Desktop |
Value Analysis
The Athlon Neo X2 L335 launched at $80 MSRP, while the Athlon X2 340 debuted at $30. At current prices ($15 vs $15), the Athlon X2 340 is $0 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon Neo X2 L335 delivers 88.7 pts/$ vs 88.9 pts/$ for the Athlon X2 340 — making the Athlon X2 340 the 0.2% better value option.
| Feature | Athlon Neo X2 L335 | Athlon X2 340 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $80 | $30-63% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $15 | $15 |
| Performance per Dollar | 88.7 | 88.9 |
| Release Date | 2009 | 2012 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Athlon Neo X2 L335 and Athlon X2 340
