Turion II Neo K685 vs Xeon E3120

Turion II Neo K685 vs Xeon E3120 Performance Spectrum

Turion II Neo K685

2 / 2

1,424

+1.1%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

Xeon E3120

1,408

0.0%

Celeron B820

Pentium Dual-Core E2180

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.

Turion II Neo K685 vs Xeon E3120 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.

Turion II Neo K685 vs Xeon E3120: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Turion II Neo K685

2010

Why buy it

✅Draws 1W instead of 65W, a 64W reduction.

Trade-offs

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

Xeon E3120

2008

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,408 vs 1,424).
❌6400% higher power demand at 65W vs 1W.

Quick Answers

So, is Turion II Neo K685 better than Xeon E3120?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon E3120 makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Turion II Neo K685 is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Turion II Neo K685 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 1.5% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Turion II Neo K685 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 2 threads.

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

Turion II Neo K685 still makes the most sense overall. Turion II Neo K685 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 1.5% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Turion II Neo K685 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2010 vs 2008). That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Turion II Neo K685 vs Xeon E3120 Technical Specifications

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

Turion II Neo K685

The Turion II Neo K685 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Geneva (2010) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.8 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: S1g4. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,424 points. Launch price was $69.

Xeon E3120

The Xeon E3120 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2015-01-01. Base frequency: 3.16 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB L2 Cache. Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: LGA775. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Passmark benchmark score: 1,408 points. Launch price was $800.

⚡

Processing Power

The Turion II Neo K685 is built on the Geneva (2010) architecture. In PassMark, the Turion II Neo K685 scores 1,424 against the Xeon E3120's 1,408 — a 1.1% lead for the Turion II Neo K685.

Feature	Turion II Neo K685	Xeon E3120
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	—
Boost Clock	1.8 GHz	—
Base Clock	—	3.16 GHz
L3 Cache	—	6 MB L2 Cache
L2 Cache	1 MB	—
Process	45 nm	45 nm
Architecture	Geneva (2010)	—
PassMark	1,424+1%	1,408

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Turion II Neo K685 uses the S1g4 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Xeon E3120 uses LGA775 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.