Athlon II X4 651 vs Athlon 200GE

VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon 200GE
2018
2 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
2.59
+14.6%
Athlon II X4 651
2011
4 cores / 4 threads, 100 Watt
2.26

Athlon 200GE outperforms Athlon II X4 651 by a moderate 15% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon 200GE and Athlon II X4 651 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking17361830
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation4.27no data
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
SeriesAMD Athlonno data
Power efficiency7.002.14
Architecture codenameZen (2017−2020)Llano (2011−2012)
Release date1 June 2018 (6 years ago)14 November 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$55no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Athlon 200GE and Athlon II X4 651 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores2 (Dual-core)4 (Quad-Core)
Threads44
Base clock speed3.2 GHz3 GHz
Boost clock speed3.2 GHz3 GHz
Multiplier32no data
L1 cache96K (per core)128 KB (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache4 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography14 nm32 nm
Die size209.78 mm2228 mm2
Number of transistors4,800 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Athlon 200GE and Athlon II X4 651 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration1 (Uniprocessor)1
SocketAM4FM1
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt100 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 200GE and Athlon II X4 651. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-
Precision Boost 2+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 200GE and Athlon II X4 651 are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 200GE and Athlon II X4 651. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Dual-channelDDR3
Maximum memory size64 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth42.671 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon Vega 3no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Athlon 200GE and Athlon II X4 651.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes12no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Athlon 200GE 2.59
+14.6%
Athlon II X4 651 2.26

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Athlon 200GE 4115
+14.8%
Athlon II X4 651 3584

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Athlon 200GE 924
+177%
Athlon II X4 651 333

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Athlon 200GE 1914
+72.7%
Athlon II X4 651 1108

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 2.59 2.26
Recency 1 June 2018 14 November 2011
Physical cores 2 4
Chip lithography 14 nm 32 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 100 Watt

Athlon 200GE has a 14.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 6 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 185.7% lower power consumption.

Athlon II X4 651, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores.

The Athlon 200GE is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon II X4 651 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 200GE and Athlon II X4 651, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD Athlon 200GE
Athlon 200GE
AMD Athlon II X4 651
Athlon II X4 651

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.9 769 votes

Rate Athlon 200GE on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 186 votes

Rate Athlon II X4 651 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon 200GE or Athlon II X4 651, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.