Athlon X2 L310 vs Turion X2 RM-74

Athlon X2 L310 vs Turion X2 RM-74 Performance Spectrum

Athlon X2 L310

2 / 2

1,747

+0.4%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Turion X2 RM-74

2 / 2

1,740

0.0%

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 X2 L310 vs Turion X2 RM-74 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 X2 L310 vs Turion X2 RM-74: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Athlon X2 L310

2009

Why buy it

✅+0.4% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

❌Launch MSRP is still $100 MSRP, while Turion X2 RM-74 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Turion X2 RM-74

2009

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,740 vs 1,747).

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon X2 L310 better than Turion X2 RM-74?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Turion X2 RM-74 is ahead with a 0.3% average FPS lead across 48 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Athlon X2 L310 pulls ahead with 0.4% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Athlon X2 L310 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Athlon X2 L310 is the better buy right now. Athlon X2 L310 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $100 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 0.4% better PassMark. The compromise is that Turion X2 RM-74 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 0.3% average FPS lead across 48 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (17.5 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 X2 L310 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 X2 L310 vs Turion X2 RM-74 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon X2 L310

The Athlon X2 L310 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Conesus (2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.2 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: S1. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,747 points. Launch price was $149.

Turion X2 RM-74

The Turion X2 RM-74 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Lion (2008−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: S1. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,740 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon X2 L310 and Turion X2 RM-74 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.2 GHz on the Athlon X2 L310 versus 2.2 GHz on the Turion X2 RM-74 — a 58.8% clock advantage for the Turion X2 RM-74. The Athlon X2 L310 uses the Conesus (2009) architecture (65 nm), while the Turion X2 RM-74 uses Lion (2008−2009) (65 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon X2 L310 scores 1,747 against the Turion X2 RM-74's 1,740 — a 0.4% lead for the Athlon X2 L310.

Feature	Athlon X2 L310	Turion X2 RM-74
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	1.2 GHz	2.2 GHz+83%
L3 Cache	—	0 kB
L2 Cache	1 MB	1 MB
Process	65 nm	65 nm
Architecture	Conesus (2009)	Lion (2008−2009)
PassMark	1,747	1,740
Geekbench 6 Single	120	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	213	—