Athlon XP 2500+ vs E-240

AMD

Athlon XP 2500+

1 Cores1 Thrd68 WWMax: 1.83 GHz2003
Similar parts
·······
VS
AMD

E-240

1 Cores1 Thrd512 WWMax: 1.5 GHz2011
Similar parts
·······

Athlon XP 2500+ vs E-240 Performance Spectrum

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 XP 2500+ vs E-240: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Athlon XP 2500+

2003

Why buy it

  • Draws 68W instead of 512W, a 444W reduction.
  • Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike E-240.

Trade-offs

  • Lower PassMark (320 vs 338).
  • Launch MSRP is still $172 MSRP, while E-240 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

E-240

2011

Why buy it

  • +5.6% higher PassMark.

Trade-offs

  • 652.9% higher power demand at 512W vs 68W.
  • No boxed cooler included, unlike Athlon XP 2500+.

Quick Answers

So, is Athlon XP 2500+ better than E-240?
It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Athlon XP 2500+ is ahead with 22% higher max boost clock. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, E-240 pulls ahead with 5.6% better PassMark.
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, E-240 is the stronger fit. You are getting 5.6% better PassMark, backed by 1 cores and 1 threads.
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Athlon XP 2500+ is the better buy right now. Athlon XP 2500+ comes in at an unclear MSRP at $172 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 22% higher max boost clock. The compromise is that E-240 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 5.6% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (1.9 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
E-240 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2011 vs 2003) and more multi-core headroom with 1 cores / 1 threads instead of 1/1. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Athlon XP 2500+ vs E-240 Technical Specifications

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

AMD

Athlon XP 2500+

The Athlon XP 2500+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Barton (2001−2004) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.83 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: A. Thermal design power (TDP): 68 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 320 points. Launch price was $149.

AMD

E-240

The E-240 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 4 January 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Zacate (2011−2013) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 40 nm process technology. Socket: FT1. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB. Memory support: DDR3 Single-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 338 points. Launch price was $69.

Processing Power

Both the Athlon XP 2500+ and E-240 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.83 GHz on the Athlon XP 2500+ versus 1.5 GHz on the E-240 — a 19.8% clock advantage for the Athlon XP 2500+. The Athlon XP 2500+ uses the Barton (2001−2004) architecture (130 nm), while the E-240 uses Zacate (2011−2013) (40 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon XP 2500+ scores 320 against the E-240's 338 — a 5.5% lead for the E-240. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

FeatureAthlon XP 2500+E-240
Cores / Threads
1 / 1
1 / 1
Boost Clock
1.83 GHz+22%
1.5 GHz
L3 Cache
0 kB
0 kB
L2 Cache
512 kB
512 kB
Process
130 nm
40 nm-69%
Architecture
Barton (2001−2004)
Zacate (2011−2013)
PassMark
320
338+6%
🧠

Memory & Platform

The Athlon XP 2500+ uses the A socket (PCIe 1.1), while the E-240 uses FT1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

FeatureAthlon XP 2500+E-240
Socket
A
FT1
PCIe Generation
PCIe 1.1
PCIe 2.0+82%
Max RAM Speed
DDR-400
Max RAM Capacity
2 GB
RAM Channels
1
ECC Support
No
🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: false (Athlon XP 2500+) / not specified (E-240).

FeatureAthlon XP 2500+E-240
Integrated GPU
No
Unlocked
No
AVX-512
No
Virtualization
false