Turion 64 X2 TL-56 vs Athlon X4 750K

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 Turion 64 X2 TL-56 is positioned at rank 139 and the Athlon X4 750K is on rank 576, so the Turion 64 X2 TL-56 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 Turion 64 X2 TL-56

#36

Core i5-11500B

MSRP: $185|Avg: $185

98%

#127

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

310%

#128

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

306%

#129

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

281%

#130

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

280%

#131

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

277%

#133

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

268%

#134

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

257%

#135

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

256%

#136

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

249%

#139

Turion 64 X2 TL-56

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#140

Core 2 Duo P8700

MSRP: $241|Avg: $85

99%

#147

Atom N2800

MSRP: $47|Avg: $3

97%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Athlon X4 750K

#1

Ryzen 9 7950X

MSRP: $194|Avg: $20

9852%

#2

Core i9-10900T

MSRP: $120|Avg: $5

9309%

#3

Ryzen 3 PRO 4355GE

MSRP: $423|Avg: $5

6759%

#4

Ryzen Threadripper 3960X

MSRP: $1399|Avg: $85

2036%

#5

Ryzen 9 9950X

MSRP: $649|Avg: $129

1613%

#6

Ryzen 5 8400F

MSRP: $303|Avg: $55

1411%

#7

Ryzen 7 PRO 2700

MSRP: $299|Avg: $60

808%

#8

Ryzen 5 2600X

MSRP: $229|Avg: $55

798%

#9

Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G

MSRP: $150|Avg: $60

726%

#10

Core Ultra 5 245KF

MSRP: $294|Avg: $189

726%

#11

Ryzen 5 5500

MSRP: $159|Avg: $85

718%

#12

Ryzen 5 3600

MSRP: $199|Avg: $80

699%

#13

Core i3-9100E

MSRP: $202|Avg: $30

689%

#14

Core Ultra 5 245K

MSRP: $319|Avg: $200

686%

#15

Core i3-8300T

MSRP: $138|Avg: $25

680%

#278

Ryzen Threadripper 1900X

MSRP: $549|Avg: $116

97%

#576

Athlon X4 750K

MSRP: $91|Avg: $17

100%

#577

Core i7-7700K

MSRP: $305|Avg: $140

100%

#578

Core i5-7600K

MSRP: $217|Avg: $84

99%

#579

FX-6300

MSRP: $132|Avg: $35

99%

#581

Core i3-6100T

MSRP: $117|Avg: $20

98%

#582

Athlon X4 970

MSRP: $85|Avg: $85

98%

#583

FX-8370

MSRP: $199|Avg: $100

98%

#584

Pentium G4520

MSRP: $86|Avg: $45

98%

#585

Core i3-4170

MSRP: $117|Avg: $40

98%

#586

Celeron G460

MSRP: $37|Avg: $10

98%

#587

A4 PRO-7350B

MSRP: $50|Avg: $11

98%

#589

Pentium G3220T

MSRP: $54|Avg: $15

97%

#590

Celeron G1620

MSRP: $52|Avg: $40

96%

#591

Core i5-7600T

MSRP: $192|Avg: $60

96%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Performance Leadership: The Athlon X4 750K delivers superior performance across the board. It outperforms the Turion 64 X2 TL-56 in both compute-intensive tasks (1.5% faster) and gaming workloads.

Insight	Turion 64 X2 TL-56	Athlon X4 750K
Gaming	❌ Lower gaming performance	✅ Superior gaming performance
Workstation	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks	✅ Better multi-core power
Price	✅ More affordable ($0)	⚠️ Higher cost ($17)
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Trinidad / Tyler (2007) / 90/65 nm)	🛑 Legacy (Trinity (2012−2013) / 32 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

Insight	Turion 64 X2 TL-56	Athlon X4 750K
Cost Efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	✅ More affordable ($0)	⚠️ Higher cost ($17)

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.

Turion 64 X2 TL-56 Benchmark Check

Athlon X4 750K Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Turion 64 X2 TL-56 and Athlon X4 750K

Turion 64 X2 TL-56

The Turion 64 X2 TL-56 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Trinidad / Tyler (2007) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.8 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 90/65 nm process technology. Socket: S1. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 2,835 points. Launch price was $69.

Athlon X4 750K

The Athlon X4 750K is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Trinity (2012−2013) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.4 GHz, with boost up to 4 GHz. L2 cache: 4 MB (total). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FM2. Thermal design power (TDP): 100 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1866. Passmark benchmark score: 2,879 points. Launch price was $149.

⚡

Processing Power

The Turion 64 X2 TL-56 packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the Athlon X4 750K offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the Athlon X4 750K has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 1.8 GHz on the Turion 64 X2 TL-56 versus 4 GHz on the Athlon X4 750K — a 75.9% clock advantage for the Athlon X4 750K. The Turion 64 X2 TL-56 uses the Trinidad / Tyler (2007) architecture (90/65 nm), while the Athlon X4 750K uses Trinity (2012−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Turion 64 X2 TL-56 scores 2,835 against the Athlon X4 750K's 2,879 — a 1.5% lead for the Athlon X4 750K.

Feature	Turion 64 X2 TL-56	Athlon X4 750K
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	1.8 GHz	4 GHz+122%
Base Clock	—	3.4 GHz
L2 Cache	1 MB	4 MB (total)+300%
Process	90/65 nm	32 nm-64%
Architecture	Trinidad / Tyler (2007)	Trinity (2012−2013)
PassMark	2,835	2,879+2%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Turion 64 X2 TL-56 uses the S1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Athlon X4 750K uses FM2 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.