Athlon XP 2600+
E-240
Athlon XP 2600+ 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 2600+ vs E-240 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.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Among Us
Apex Legends
ARC Raiders
Baldur's Gate 3
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
Athlon XP 2600+ 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 2600+
2001Why buy it
- ✅Draws 68W instead of 512W, a 444W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Launch MSRP is still $98 MSRP, while E-240 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
E-240
2011Why buy it
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (338 vs 340).
- ❌652.9% higher power demand at 512W vs 68W.
Quick Answers
So, is Athlon XP 2600+ better than E-240?
Which one is better for gaming?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Athlon XP 2600+ vs E-240 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
Athlon XP 2600+
The Athlon XP 2600+ is manufactured by AMD. It was released in Janeiro 2001 (24 years ago). It is based on the Barton (2001−2004) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.92 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: A. Thermal design power (TDP): 68 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 340 points. Launch price was $23.
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 2600+ and E-240 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.92 GHz on the Athlon XP 2600+ versus 1.5 GHz on the E-240 — a 24.6% clock advantage for the Athlon XP 2600+. The Athlon XP 2600+ uses the Barton (2001−2004) architecture (130 nm), while the E-240 uses Zacate (2011−2013) (40 nm). In PassMark, the Athlon XP 2600+ scores 340 against the E-240's 338 — a 0.6% lead for the Athlon XP 2600+. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | Athlon XP 2600+ | E-240 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 1 / 1 |
| Boost Clock | 1.92 GHz+28% | 1.5 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 512K | 512 kB |
| Process | 130 nm | 40 nm-69% |
| Architecture | Barton (2001−2004) | Zacate (2011−2013) |
| PassMark | 340 | 338 |
Memory & Platform
The Athlon XP 2600+ uses the A socket (PCIe 1.1), while the E-240 uses FT1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Athlon XP 2600+ | E-240 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | A | FT1 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR-333 | — |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB | — |
| RAM Channels | 1 | — |
| ECC Support | Yes | — |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | — |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Athlon XP 2600+ and E-240
