Core m7-6Y75 vs Athlon II X4 645
Core m7-6Y75
Athlon II X4 645
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 m7-6Y75 is positioned at rank 1189 and the Athlon II X4 645 is on rank 819, so the Athlon II X4 645 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Core m7-6Y75
Performance Per Dollar Athlon II X4 645
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Core m7-6Y75 | Athlon II X4 645 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | Balanced gaming performance | Balanced gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($393) | ✅ More affordable ($20) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Skylake-Y (2015) / 14 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Propus (2009−2011) / 45 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Core m7-6Y75 | Athlon II X4 645 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+1875%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($393) | ✅ More affordable ($20) |
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 m7-6Y75 and Athlon II X4 645
Core m7-6Y75
The Core m7-6Y75 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Skylake-Y (2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.1 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1515. Thermal design power (TDP): 4.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,363 points. Launch price was $393.
Athlon II X4 645
The Athlon II X4 645 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 3.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.1 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 95 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,375 points. Launch price was $80.
Processing Power
The Core m7-6Y75 packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the Athlon II X4 645 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Athlon II X4 645 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.1 GHz on the Core m7-6Y75 versus 3.1 GHz on the Athlon II X4 645 — identical boost frequencies (base: 1.2 GHz vs 3.1 GHz). The Core m7-6Y75 uses the Skylake-Y (2015) architecture (14 nm), while the Athlon II X4 645 uses Propus (2009−2011) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Core m7-6Y75 scores 2,363 against the Athlon II X4 645's 2,375 — a 0.5% lead for the Athlon II X4 645. L3 cache: 4 MB (total) on the Core m7-6Y75 vs 0 kB on the Athlon II X4 645.
| Feature | Core m7-6Y75 | Athlon II X4 645 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 4 | 4 / 4+100% |
| Boost Clock | 3.1 GHz | 3.1 GHz |
| Base Clock | 1.2 GHz | 3.1 GHz+158% |
| L3 Cache | 4 MB (total) | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 256 kB (per core) | 512 kB (per core)+100% |
| Process | 14 nm-69% | 45 nm |
| Architecture | Skylake-Y (2015) | Propus (2009−2011) |
| PassMark | 2,363 | 2,375 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | — | 1,374 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 399 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 1,374 |
Memory & Platform
The Core m7-6Y75 uses the FCBGA1515 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Athlon II X4 645 uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | Core m7-6Y75 | Athlon II X4 645 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FCBGA1515 | 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 m7-6Y75) / Yes (Athlon II X4 645). Primary use case: Athlon II X4 645 targets Desktop.
| Feature | Core m7-6Y75 | Athlon II X4 645 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | — | No |
| AVX-512 | — | No |
| Virtualization | — | Yes |
| Target Use | — | Desktop |
Value Analysis
The Core m7-6Y75 launched at $393 MSRP, while the Athlon II X4 645 debuted at $126. At current prices ($393 vs $20), the Athlon II X4 645 is $373 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Core m7-6Y75 delivers 6.0 pts/$ vs 118.8 pts/$ for the Athlon II X4 645 — making the Athlon II X4 645 the 180.7% better value option.
| Feature | Core m7-6Y75 | Athlon II X4 645 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $393 | $126-68% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $393 | $20-95% |
| Performance per Dollar | 6.0 | 118.8+1880% |
| Release Date | 2015 | 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 m7-6Y75 and Athlon II X4 645
