Athlon XP 1500+ vs Athlon 64 2600+

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Athlon 64 2600+
2008
1 core / 1 thread, 15 Watt
0.15
+36.4%
Athlon XP 1500+
2001
1 core / 1 thread, 60 Watt
0.11

Athlon 64 2600+ outperforms Athlon XP 1500+ by a substantial 36% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Athlon 64 2600+ and Athlon XP 1500+ processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking33103378
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency0.950.17
Architecture codenameLima (2008−2009)Palomino (2001)
Release dateJanuary 2008 (16 years ago)October 2001 (23 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Athlon 64 2600+ and Athlon XP 1500+ 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 cores1 (Single-Core)1 (Single-Core)
Threads11
Boost clock speed1.6 GHz1.33 GHz
L1 cache128 KB128 KB
L2 cache512 KB256 KB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography65 nm180 nm
Die size77 mm2150 mm2
Number of transistors122 million63 million
64 bit support+-
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Athlon 64 2600+ and Athlon XP 1500+ 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 configuration11
SocketAM2A
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt60 Watt

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 64 2600+ 0.15
+36.4%
Athlon XP 1500+ 0.11

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 64 2600+ 243
+45.5%
Athlon XP 1500+ 167

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.15 0.11
Chip lithography 65 nm 180 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 60 Watt

Athlon 64 2600+ has a 36.4% higher aggregate performance score, a 176.9% more advanced lithography process, and 300% lower power consumption.

The Athlon 64 2600+ is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon XP 1500+ in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 2600+ and Athlon XP 1500+, 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 64 2600+
Athlon 64 2600+
AMD Athlon XP 1500+
Athlon XP 1500+

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 1 vote

Rate Athlon 64 2600 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.9 21 vote

Rate Athlon XP 1500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon 64 2600+ or Athlon XP 1500+, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.