Turion 64 MK-36 vs Athlon 64 FX-55
Aggregate performance score
Athlon 64 FX-55 outperforms Turion 64 MK-36 by a moderate 19% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Athlon 64 FX-55 and Turion 64 MK-36 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3163 | 3217 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Turion 64 |
| Power efficiency | 0.23 | 0.64 |
| Architecture codename | Clawhammer (2001−2005) | Richmond |
| Release date | 10 October 2004 (20 years ago) | no data |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $180 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Athlon 64 FX-55 and Turion 64 MK-36 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 cores | 1 (Single-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 2.6 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 2 GHz |
| Bus rate | no data | 800 MHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | no data |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | no data |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | no data |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 90 nm |
| Die size | 193 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 63 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 105 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 64 FX-55 and Turion 64 MK-36 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 configuration | 1 | no data |
| Socket | 939 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 104 Watt | 31 Watt |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 FX-55 and Turion 64 MK-36. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR1 Depends on motherboard | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) | no 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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.25 | 0.21 |
| Chip lithography | 130 nm | 90 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 104 Watt | 31 Watt |
Athlon 64 FX-55 has a 19% higher aggregate performance score.
Turion 64 MK-36, on the other hand, has a 44.4% more advanced lithography process, and 235.5% lower power consumption.
The Athlon 64 FX-55 is our recommended choice as it beats the Turion 64 MK-36 in performance tests.
Note that Athlon 64 FX-55 is a desktop processor while Turion 64 MK-36 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 FX-55 and Turion 64 MK-36, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
