
PRO A4-8350B vs Athlon X2 QL-66

PRO A4-8350B

Athlon X2 QL-66
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 PRO A4-8350B is positioned at rank 553 and the Athlon X2 QL-66 is on rank 1048, so the PRO A4-8350B offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar PRO A4-8350B
Performance Per Dollar Athlon X2 QL-66
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | PRO A4-8350B | Athlon X2 QL-66 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($5) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Kaveri (2014−2015) / 28 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Lion (2008−2009) / 65 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | PRO A4-8350B | Athlon X2 QL-66 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($0) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($5) |
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 PRO A4-8350B and Athlon X2 QL-66

PRO A4-8350B
The PRO A4-8350B is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 29 September 2015 (10 years ago). It is based on the Kaveri (2014−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.9 GHz. L2 cache: 1024 kB. Built on 28 nm process technology. Socket: FM2+. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1866. Passmark benchmark score: 1,690 points. Launch price was $69.

Athlon X2 QL-66
The Athlon X2 QL-66 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Lion (2008−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2.2 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: S1g2. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,695 points. Launch price was $149.
Processing Power
Both the PRO A4-8350B and Athlon X2 QL-66 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.9 GHz on the PRO A4-8350B versus 2.2 GHz on the Athlon X2 QL-66 — a 55.7% clock advantage for the PRO A4-8350B. The PRO A4-8350B uses the Kaveri (2014−2015) architecture (28 nm), while the Athlon X2 QL-66 uses Lion (2008−2009) (65 nm). In PassMark, the PRO A4-8350B scores 1,690 against the Athlon X2 QL-66's 1,695 — a 0.3% lead for the Athlon X2 QL-66.
| Feature | PRO A4-8350B | Athlon X2 QL-66 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 3.9 GHz+77% | 2.2 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.5 GHz | — |
| L2 Cache | 1024 kB | 1 MB |
| Process | 28 nm-57% | 65 nm |
| Architecture | Kaveri (2014−2015) | Lion (2008−2009) |
| PassMark | 1,690 | 1,695 |
Memory & Platform
The PRO A4-8350B uses the FM2+ socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Athlon X2 QL-66 uses S1g2 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.
| Feature | PRO A4-8350B | Athlon X2 QL-66 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FM2+ | S1g2 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0+50% | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | — | DDR2-667 |
| Max RAM Capacity | — | 8 GB |
| RAM Channels | — | 2 |
| ECC Support | — | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | — | 0 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
















