How Is An Athlon II 240 Stand Up To Modern Gaming?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
M

marcdisa

Banned
Nov 21, 2009
61
0
0
Athlon II 240 2.8GHZ Dual Core....from what I understand 3.2GHZ-3.4GHZ should be achievable with stock cooling. How is the chip going to stand up to modern games?
 
M

Mothergoose729

Senior member
Mar 21, 2009
409
2
81
I don't think the athlon II "struggles" with anything. There are better processors out there, maybe the athlon quads might be worth the little extra money. If you get it and a good GPU you will be right there in the action.
 
M

Marty502

Senior member
Aug 25, 2007
497
0
0
Was just gonna do this thread. :)

So if you don't mind I'll pop a related question...

How much faster would you guys say is the Athlon II compared clock by clock to, say, my own first-gen X2? For gaming, specifically.

At FPU benches I've seen it double (yup, 100% more) my chip's clock by clock performance, yet in integer tests it's just around 20% faster clock by clock. How does that translate to gaming?

This is the DDR1 chip, with 512 kb of cache per core.
 
cbn

cbn

Lifer
Mar 27, 2009
12,968
221
106
Marty502 said:
How much faster would you guys say is the Athlon II compared clock by clock to, say, my own first-gen X2? For gaming, specifically.
Click to expand...

I don't think they compare Athlon II to first generation X2 in that article. I did see a comparison to 5600 X2 though.
 
M

Marty502

Senior member
Aug 25, 2007
497
0
0
Yup.
Still, by checking those benchies I'd say the Athlon II is, give or take, around 25-30% faster in games, clock by clock.
Compared to my first gen X2.

Given that the Athlon II can usually be overclocked around 3.5 Ghz and higher... That would be well over a 50% CPU boost over my current rig.

Nice. :D
 
cbn

cbn

Lifer
Mar 27, 2009
12,968
221
106
Mothergoose729 said:
I don't think the athlon II "struggles" with anything. There are better processors out there, maybe the athlon quads might be worth the little extra money. If you get it and a good GPU you will be right there in the action.
Click to expand...

I think so too.
 
Last edited:
J

jvroig

Platinum Member
Nov 4, 2009
2,394
1
81
Marty502 said:
How much faster would you guys say is the Athlon II compared clock by clock to, say, my own first-gen X2? For gaming, specifically.
Click to expand...
Marty502 said:
Still, by checking those benchies I'd say the Athlon II is, give or take, around 25-30% faster in games, clock by clock. Compared to my first gen X2.
Click to expand...
Interested in this topic as well, I also have an X2 (5000+). Clock for clock comparison of classic X2 versus the Athlon II.

Not really a 25-30% difference.
 
J

jvroig

Platinum Member
Nov 4, 2009
2,394
1
81
Mothergoose729 said:
I don't think the athlon II "struggles" with anything. There are better processors out there, maybe the athlon quads might be worth the little extra money. If you get it and a good GPU you will be right there in the action.
Click to expand...
Have to agree. Unless, of course, you have 1280x1024 or lower resolution.

The caveat of course, is that there maybe a few games that might be CPU intensive in a few areas or situations, so getting a faster dual-core or a comparable quad-core certainly won't hurt. But as it is, the Athlon II should be a fine price/performance choice.
 
StrangerGuy

StrangerGuy

Diamond Member
May 9, 2004
8,443
124
106
The prices of Athlon X4 and Phenom II X3 is already so low nowadays that it makes no sense to buy a dual-core.
 
J

jvroig

Platinum Member
Nov 4, 2009
2,394
1
81
StrangerGuy said:
The prices of Athlon X4 and Phenom II X3 is already so low nowadays that it makes no sense to buy a dual-core.
Click to expand...
That's pretty much my personal mantra. The price difference is well within my tolerance.

Other people though might have a little less tolerance and decide to squeeze even the small savings. And corporate purchasers as well, for example, especially if ordering in bulk. A $20 difference may not matter if you are buying just one, but if it's a bulk order of a hundred units, that's a cool $2,000.00.
 
exar333

exar333

Diamond Member
Feb 7, 2004
8,518
8
91
jvroig said:
That's pretty much my personal mantra. The price difference is well within my tolerance.

Other people though might have a little less tolerance and decide to squeeze even the small savings. And corporate purchasers as well, for example, especially if ordering in bulk. A $20 difference may not matter if you are buying just one, but if it's a bulk order of a hundred units, that's a cool $2,000.00.
Click to expand...

The C2D is much better with power usage for dual-cores vs. X2 or Ph II x2s. If your not buying in bulk, a dual-core Intel is the way to go. If you want cheaper triple or quads, AMD's offerings are very good for the price. I really couldn't recommend a dualie to anyone except when power usage is key. Go for a triple or quad and be done with it.
 
monovillage

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,444
1
0
I see no valid reason to go with a core2 duo and the LGA775 when you can go cheaper with the AthlonII x2 or x3 or x4 and the AM3 platform.
 
exar333

exar333

Diamond Member
Feb 7, 2004
8,518
8
91
monovillage said:
I see no valid reason to go with a core2 duo and the LGA775 when you can go cheaper with the AthlonII x2 or x3 or x4 and the AM3 platform.
Click to expand...

Because the C2D is faster and more power efficient? If you are scrimping pennies and getting a dual core, I doubt you are spending much on a MB that would make it important for future upgrades.
 
monovillage

monovillage

Diamond Member
Jul 3, 2008
8,444
1
0
ExarKun333 said:
Because the C2D is faster and more power efficient? If you are scrimping pennies and getting a dual core, I doubt you are spending much on a MB that would make it important for future upgrades.
Click to expand...

I'd disagree with that, future upgrades with the AM3 would be considerably cheaper over the EOL LGA775. Just because someone doesn't have a chunk of money to dump into a system right now doesn't mean they can't drop $150 or $200 in the future.
 
formulav8

formulav8

Diamond Member
Sep 18, 2000
7,004
522
126
There is absolutely nothing wrong with the Athlon II for gaming. I HAVE ONE that is made from a Sempron II and from all the benches and realworld stuff i've done it has NO problem pushing even a higher end video card at decent resolutions. Especially when it's clocked to 3.6ghz. I have a Core2 "Wolfdale" and I can't tell a difference between them. I have the Core2 based cpu @ 3.3ghz btw. And they both do just fine with gaming and even everything else (I've yet to do a head to head bench comparison though).

If you need a board newegg has a nice Asus for $75 shipped after cpoupon code: "EMCMNLP43". You can also send in a mir to get an extra $10 off. http://tinyurl.com/ydluacb If you don't care so much about ocing, then get the ECS IC780M-A for only $53 shipped - $14 mir. ECS actually does well with their rebates. I don't know about Asus rebates though.

Anyways, my verdict is a core2 and AthlonII does very well. The AthlonII doesn't "struggle" with pushing enough frames for a decent video card.

This is all just my experience and opinion. Take it for whatever you want. :)


Jason
 
F

fredkemp

Junior Member
Dec 24, 2009
4
0
0
I think Athlon II is not fit for prolong playing. I had one and got an issue after playing hours together and burnt the system.
 
L

LoneNinja

Senior member
Jan 5, 2009
825
0
0
fredkemp said:
I think Athlon II is not fit for prolong playing. I had one and got an issue after playing hours together and burnt the system.
Click to expand...

Either your processor was defective, you had poor cooling, or cranked the voltage way to high, because any processor should be able to run 100% usage for years straight before they die.
 
Markfw

Markfw

Moderator Emeritus, Elite Member
May 16, 2002
27,111
16,022
136
fredkemp said:
I think Athlon II is not fit for prolong playing. I had one and got an issue after playing hours together and burnt the system.
Click to expand...
Even though I said that you need a good quad for todays best games, this is ridiculous. As the previous poster said, its not the CPU, its some other problem with your system, configuration, or you overclocked it too much.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom