CPU
GPU
Core 2 Solo SU3300
Athlon II X2 260
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 Core 2 Solo SU3300 is positioned at rank 1211 and the Athlon II X2 260 is on rank 780, so the Athlon II X2 260 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Core 2 Solo SU3300
Performance Per Dollar Athlon II X2 260
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Core 2 Solo SU3300 | Athlon II X2 260 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($50) | ✅ More affordable ($12) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Penryn (2008−2011) / 45 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Regor (2009−2013) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Core 2 Solo SU3300 | Athlon II X2 260 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+317%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($50) | ✅ More affordable ($12) |
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.
Counter-Strike 2
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core 2 Solo SU3300 and Athlon II X2 260
Core 2 Solo SU3300
The Core 2 Solo SU3300 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 August 2008 (17 years ago). It is based on the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.2 GHz. L2 cache: 3 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: BGA956. Thermal design power (TDP): 3 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,247 points. Launch price was $262.
Athlon II X2 260
The Athlon II X2 260 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 11 May 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Regor (2009−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,248 points. Launch price was $48.
Processing Power
The Core 2 Solo SU3300 packs 1 cores / 1 threads, while the Athlon II X2 260 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Athlon II X2 260 has 1 more core. Boost clocks reach 1.2 GHz on the Core 2 Solo SU3300 versus 3.2 GHz on the Athlon II X2 260 — a 90.9% clock advantage for the Athlon II X2 260. The Core 2 Solo SU3300 uses the Penryn (2008−2011) architecture (45 nm), while the Athlon II X2 260 uses Regor (2009−2013) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Core 2 Solo SU3300 scores 1,247 against the Athlon II X2 260's 1,248 — a 0.1% lead for the Athlon II X2 260.
| Feature | Core 2 Solo SU3300 | Athlon II X2 260 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 1 / 1 | 2 / 2+100% |
| Boost Clock | 1.2 GHz | 3.2 GHz+167% |
| Base Clock | — | 3.2 GHz |
| L3 Cache | — | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB+200% | 1 MB |
| Process | 45 nm | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Penryn (2008−2011) | Regor (2009−2013) |
| PassMark | 1,247 | 1,248 |
Memory & Platform
The Core 2 Solo SU3300 uses the BGA956 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the Athlon II X2 260 uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR2-800 on the Core 2 Solo SU3300 versus 1333 on the Athlon II X2 260 — the Athlon II X2 260 supports 199.4% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Athlon II X2 260 supports up to 16 of RAM compared to 4 GB — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (Core 2 Solo SU3300) vs 2 (Athlon II X2 260). Both provide 0 PCIe lanes.
| Feature | Core 2 Solo SU3300 | Athlon II X2 260 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | BGA956 | AM3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 1.1 | PCIe 2.0+82% |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR2-800 | 1333+66550% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 4 GB+26214300% | 16 |
| RAM Channels | 1 | 2+100% |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Core 2 Solo SU3300) vs true (Athlon II X2 260). Primary use case: Core 2 Solo SU3300 targets Mobile. Direct competitor: Athlon II X2 260 rivals Pentium E6700.
| Feature | Core 2 Solo SU3300 | Athlon II X2 260 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | No | No |
| IGPU Model | — | None |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x | true |
| Target Use | Mobile | — |
Value Analysis
The Core 2 Solo SU3300 launched at $262 MSRP, while the Athlon II X2 260 debuted at $60. At current prices ($50 vs $12), the Athlon II X2 260 is $38 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Core 2 Solo SU3300 delivers 24.9 pts/$ vs 104.0 pts/$ for the Athlon II X2 260 — making the Athlon II X2 260 the 122.6% better value option.
| Feature | Core 2 Solo SU3300 | Athlon II X2 260 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $262 | $60-77% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $50 | $12-76% |
| Performance per Dollar | 24.9 | 104.0+318% |
| Release Date | 2008 | 2010 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Core 2 Solo SU3300 and Athlon II X2 260
