Athlon X2 QL-65 vs Pentium 967

Athlon X2 QL-65 vs Pentium 967 Performance Spectrum

Athlon X2 QL-65

2 / 2

1,630

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Pentium 967

2 / 2

1,640

+0.6%

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 QL-65 vs Pentium 967 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 QL-65 vs Pentium 967: 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 QL-65

2009

Why buy it

✅Draws 1W instead of 17W, a 16W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,630 vs 1,640).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 10.9 vs 12.2 PassMark/$ ($150 MSRP vs $134 MSRP).

Pentium 967

2011

Why buy it

✅+0.6% higher PassMark.
✅Costs $16 less on MSRP ($134 MSRP vs $150 MSRP).
✅Delivers 12.6% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 12.2 vs 10.9 PassMark/$ ($134 MSRP vs $150 MSRP).

Trade-offs

❌1600% higher power demand at 17W vs 1W.

Quick Answers

So, is Pentium 967 better than Athlon X2 QL-65?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Athlon X2 QL-65 is ahead with a 1.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Pentium 967 pulls ahead with 0.6% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Pentium 967 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.6% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Pentium 967 is the better buy right now. Pentium 967 comes in $16 cheaper on MSRP at $134 MSRP versus $150 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.6% better PassMark. The compromise is that Athlon X2 QL-65 is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 1.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 12.6% better value on MSRP (12.2 vs 10.9 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Pentium 967 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2009) and 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 QL-65 vs Pentium 967 Technical Specifications

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

Athlon X2 QL-65

The Athlon X2 QL-65 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Lion (2008−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2.1 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: S1g2. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,630 points. Launch price was $149.

Pentium 967

The Pentium 967 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2 October 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.3 GHz, with boost up to 1.3 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,640 points. Launch price was $134.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Athlon X2 QL-65 and Pentium 967 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.1 GHz on the Athlon X2 QL-65 versus 1.3 GHz on the Pentium 967 — a 47.1% clock advantage for the Athlon X2 QL-65. The Athlon X2 QL-65 uses the Lion (2008−2009) architecture (65 nm), while the Pentium 967 uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon X2 QL-65 scores 1,630 against the Pentium 967's 1,640 — a 0.6% lead for the Pentium 967. L3 cache: 0 kB on the Athlon X2 QL-65 vs 2 MB (total) on the Pentium 967.

Feature	Athlon X2 QL-65	Pentium 967
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	2 / 2
Boost Clock	2.1 GHz+62%	1.3 GHz
Base Clock	—	1.3 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	2 MB (total)
L2 Cache	1 MB	256K (per core)+25500%
Process	65 nm	32 nm-51%
Architecture	Lion (2008−2009)	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark	1,630	1,640

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon X2 QL-65 uses the S1g2 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Pentium 967 uses BGA1023 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Athlon X2 QL-65	Pentium 967
Socket	S1g2	BGA1023
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR2-667	—
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	No	—
PCIe Lanes	0	—

💰

Value Analysis

At launch, the Athlon X2 QL-65 was priced at $150, while the Pentium 967 came in at $134. On launch pricing ($150 vs $134), Pentium 967 was $16 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Athlon X2 QL-65 delivers 10.9 pts/$ vs 12.2 pts/$ for the Pentium 967 — making the Pentium 967 the 11.9% better value option.

Feature	Athlon X2 QL-65	Pentium 967
MSRP	$150	$134-11%
Performance per Dollar	10.9	12.2+12%
Release Date	2009	2011

Search Athlon X2 QL-65 on Amazon

Search Pentium 967 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.