Core i7-2640M vs FX-9800P

Core i7-2640M

2 Cores4 Thrd35 WWMax: 3.5 GHz2011

FX-9800P

4 Cores4 Thrd15 WWMax: 3.6 GHz2016

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Core i7-2640M

2 / 4

2,445

0.0%

2,460

+0.6%

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.

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 i7-2640M is positioned at rank 1159 and the FX-9800P is on rank 949, so the FX-9800P offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Core i7-2640M

#1147

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

4150%

#1148

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

4089%

#1149

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

3754%

#1150

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

3737%

#1151

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

3703%

#1153

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

3576%

#1154

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

3429%

#1155

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

3423%

#1156

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

3331%

#1159

Core i7-2640M

MSRP: $346|Avg: N/A

100%

#1161

Core M-5Y71

MSRP: $281|Avg: $281

99%

#1162

Core i7-2620M

MSRP: $346|Avg: N/A

99%

#1164

Celeron N3010

MSRP: $107|Avg: N/A

97%

#1165

Core i7-3537U

MSRP: $346|Avg: N/A

96%

#1166

Core M-5Y10a

MSRP: $281|Avg: $281

96%

#1167

Core M-5Y31

MSRP: $281|Avg: $30

96%

#1168

Core M-5Y10c

MSRP: $281|Avg: $281

96%

#1170

Celeron 1047UE

MSRP: $100|Avg: $100

95%

#1171

Core M-5Y70

MSRP: $281|Avg: $281

95%

#1172

Celeron U3400

MSRP: $86|Avg: $5

95%

#1173

Celeron T1600

MSRP: $107|Avg: $15

94%

#1174

Pro A12-8800B

MSRP: $400|Avg: $40

94%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar FX-9800P

#937

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

1789%

#938

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

1763%

#939

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

1618%

#940

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

1611%

#941

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

1596%

#943

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

1541%

#944

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

1478%

#945

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

1476%

#946

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

1436%

#949

FX-9800P

MSRP: $150|Avg: $45

100%

#951

Celeron 1020E

MSRP: $86|Avg: $20

100%

#954

Core i7-5850EQ

MSRP: $435|Avg: $370

99%

#956

Core i7-4810MQ

MSRP: $378|Avg: $378

98%

#959

Celeron Dual-Core T3500

MSRP: $80|Avg: $15

97%

#960

Celeron 4305UE

MSRP: $107|Avg: $107

97%

#963

Core i7-10510U

MSRP: $409|Avg: N/A

96%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Performance Leadership: The FX-9800P delivers superior performance across the board. It outperforms the Core i7-2640M in both compute-intensive tasks (0.6% faster) and gaming workloads.

Insight	Core i7-2640M	FX-9800P
Gaming	❌ Lower gaming performance	✅ Superior gaming performance
Workstation	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks	✅ Better multi-core power
Price	⚠️ Higher cost ($346)	✅ More affordable ($45)
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) / 32 nm)	🛑 Legacy (Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) / 28 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

Efficiency: Even within a comparison of older hardware, the FX-9800P stands out as the superior choice. It is effectively 87% cheaper ($45 vs $346) while identifying as the stronger performer.

Insight	Core i7-2640M	FX-9800P
Cost Efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency	✅ Better overall value (+674%)
Upfront Cost	⚠️ Higher cost ($346)	✅ More affordable ($45)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

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.

Core i7-2640M Benchmark Check

FX-9800P Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i7-2640M and FX-9800P

Core i7-2640M

The Core i7-2640M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 September 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,445 points. Launch price was $346.

FX-9800P

The FX-9800P is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 31 May 2016 (9 years ago). It is based on the Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 3.6 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB (per module). Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FP4. Thermal design power (TDP): 15 Watt. Memory support: DDR3, DDR4. Passmark benchmark score: 2,460 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-2640M packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the FX-9800P offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the FX-9800P has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.5 GHz on the Core i7-2640M versus 3.6 GHz on the FX-9800P — a 2.8% clock advantage for the FX-9800P (base: 2.8 GHz vs 2.7 GHz). The Core i7-2640M uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the FX-9800P uses Bristol Ridge (2016−2019) (28 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-2640M scores 2,445 against the FX-9800P's 2,460 — a 0.6% lead for the FX-9800P.

Feature	Core i7-2640M	FX-9800P
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	3.5 GHz	3.6 GHz+3%
Base Clock	2.8 GHz+4%	2.7 GHz
L3 Cache	4 MB	—
L2 Cache	512 kB	1 MB (per module)+100%
Process	32 nm	28 nm-13%
Architecture	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)	Bristol Ridge (2016−2019)
PassMark	2,445	2,460
Geekbench 6 Single	563	—
Geekbench 6 Multi	1,184	—

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-2640M uses the PGA988 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the FX-9800P uses FP4 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i7-2640M	FX-9800P
Socket	PGA988	FP4
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 3.0+50%
Max RAM Speed	1333	—
Max RAM Capacity	16	—
RAM Channels	2	—
ECC Support	❌	—
PCIe Lanes	16	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: true (Core i7-2640M) / not specified (FX-9800P). The Core i7-2640M includes integrated graphics (Intel HD Graphics 3000), while the FX-9800P requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Core i7-2640M rivals Phenom II Black Edition N660.