Core i7-940XM vs Turion II Ultra M660

Core i7-940XM vs Turion II Ultra M660 Performance Spectrum

Core i7-940XM

4 / 8

2,269

0.0%

2,278

+0.4%

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.

Core i7-940XM vs Turion II Ultra M660 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.

Core i7-940XM vs Turion II Ultra M660: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i7-940XM

2010

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,269 vs 2,278).
❌Launch MSRP is still $1,096 MSRP, while Turion II Ultra M660 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌2650% higher power demand at 55W vs 2W.

Turion II Ultra M660

2009

Why buy it

✅+0.4% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 2W instead of 55W, a 53W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i7-940XM better than Turion II Ultra M660?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core i7-940XM is ahead with a 2.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Turion II Ultra M660 pulls ahead with 0.4% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Turion II Ultra M660 is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.4% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Core i7-940XM is the better buy right now. Core i7-940XM comes in at an unclear MSRP at $1,096 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Turion II Ultra M660 is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.4% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (2.1 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Core i7-940XM makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2010 vs 2009). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i7-940XM vs Turion II Ultra M660 Technical Specifications

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

Core i7-940XM

The Core i7-940XM is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 20 June 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Clarksfield (2009−2010) architecture. It features 4 cores and 8 threads. Base frequency is 2.13 GHz, with boost up to 3.33 GHz. L3 cache: 8 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: PGA988. Thermal design power (TDP): 55 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333. Passmark benchmark score: 2,269 points. Launch price was $1,096.

Turion II Ultra M660

The Turion II Ultra M660 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Caspian (2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2.7 GHz. L2 cache: 2 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: S1g3. Thermal design power (TDP): 2 MB. Memory support: DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 2,278 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i7-940XM packs 4 cores / 8 threads, while the Turion II Ultra M660 offers 2 cores / 2 threads — the Core i7-940XM has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.33 GHz on the Core i7-940XM versus 2.7 GHz on the Turion II Ultra M660 — a 20.9% clock advantage for the Core i7-940XM. The Core i7-940XM uses the Clarksfield (2009−2010) architecture (45 nm), while the Turion II Ultra M660 uses Caspian (2009) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Core i7-940XM scores 2,269 against the Turion II Ultra M660's 2,278 — a 0.4% lead for the Turion II Ultra M660.

Feature	Core i7-940XM	Turion II Ultra M660
Cores / Threads	4 / 8+100%	2 / 2
Boost Clock	3.33 GHz+23%	2.7 GHz
Base Clock	2.13 GHz	—
L3 Cache	8 MB (total)	—
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	2 MB+700%
Process	45 nm	45 nm
Architecture	Clarksfield (2009−2010)	Caspian (2009)
PassMark	2,269	2,278

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i7-940XM uses the PGA988 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Turion II Ultra M660 uses S1g3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 1333 on the Core i7-940XM versus DDR2-800 on the Turion II Ultra M660 — the Core i7-940XM supports 66.6% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 8 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. PCIe lanes: 16 (Core i7-940XM) vs 0 (Turion II Ultra M660) — the Core i7-940XM offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.

Feature	Core i7-940XM	Turion II Ultra M660
Socket	PGA988	S1g3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 2.0	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	1333+67%	DDR2-800
Max RAM Capacity	8 GB	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	0

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Core i7-940XM has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Virtualization support: true (Core i7-940XM) vs AMD-V (Turion II Ultra M660). Primary use case: Turion II Ultra M660 targets Mobile. Direct competitor: Core i7-940XM rivals Core i7-2720QM.