Core M-5Y51 vs Athlon II X4 615e
Core M-5Y51
Athlon II X4 615e
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 M-5Y51 is positioned at rank 1154 and the Athlon II X4 615e is on rank 983, so the Athlon II X4 615e offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Core M-5Y51
Performance Per Dollar Athlon II X4 615e
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Core M-5Y51 | Athlon II X4 615e |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($281) | ✅ More affordable ($30) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Broadwell-Y (2014) / 14 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Propus (2009−2011) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Core M-5Y51 | Athlon II X4 615e |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+831%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($281) | ✅ More affordable ($30) |
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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core M-5Y51 and Athlon II X4 615e
Core M-5Y51
The Core M-5Y51 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 27 October 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Broadwell-Y (2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.1 GHz, with boost up to 2.6 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1234. Thermal design power (TDP): 4.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,030 points. Launch price was $69.
Athlon II X4 615e
The Athlon II X4 615e is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 21 September 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Propus (2009−2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,018 points. Launch price was $59.
Processing Power
The Core M-5Y51 packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the Athlon II X4 615e offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Athlon II X4 615e has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.6 GHz on the Core M-5Y51 versus 2.5 GHz on the Athlon II X4 615e — a 3.9% clock advantage for the Core M-5Y51 (base: 1.1 GHz vs 2.5 GHz). The Core M-5Y51 uses the Broadwell-Y (2014) architecture (14 nm), while the Athlon II X4 615e uses Propus (2009−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Core M-5Y51 scores 2,030 against the Athlon II X4 615e's 2,018 — a 0.6% lead for the Core M-5Y51. L3 cache: 4 MB (total) on the Core M-5Y51 vs 0 kB on the Athlon II X4 615e.
| Feature | Core M-5Y51 | Athlon II X4 615e |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 4 | 4 / 4+100% |
| Boost Clock | 2.6 GHz+4% | 2.5 GHz |
| Base Clock | 1.1 GHz | 2.5 GHz+127% |
| L3 Cache | 4 MB (total) | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 256K (per core) | 512 kB (per core)+100% |
| Process | 14 nm-69% | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Broadwell-Y (2014) | Propus (2009−2011) |
| PassMark | 2,030 | 2,018 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | — | 1,161 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 331 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 1,161 |
Memory & Platform
The Core M-5Y51 uses the FCBGA1234 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Athlon II X4 615e uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core M-5Y51 | Athlon II X4 615e |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA1234 | AM3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+50% | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | — | DDR3-1333 |
| Max RAM Capacity | — | 16 GB |
| RAM Channels | — | 2 |
| ECC Support | — | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | — | 16 |
Advanced Features
Virtualization: not specified (Core M-5Y51) / AMD-V (Athlon II X4 615e). Primary use case: Athlon II X4 615e targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Athlon II X4 615e rivals Intel Core 2 Quad Q8300.
| Feature | Core M-5Y51 | Athlon II X4 615e |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | — | No |
| Unlocked | — | Yes |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | AMD-V |
| Target Use | — | Gaming |
Value Analysis
The Core M-5Y51 launched at $281 MSRP, while the Athlon II X4 615e debuted at $186. At current prices ($281 vs $30), the Athlon II X4 615e is $251 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Core M-5Y51 delivers 7.2 pts/$ vs 67.3 pts/$ for the Athlon II X4 615e — making the Athlon II X4 615e the 161.2% better value option.
| Feature | Core M-5Y51 | Athlon II X4 615e |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $281 | $186-34% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $281 | $30-89% |
| Performance per Dollar | 7.2 | 67.3+835% |
| Release Date | 2014 | 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 M-5Y51 and Athlon II X4 615e
