Athlon X4 840 vs Phenom II X2 X640 BE
Aggregate performance score
Athlon X4 840 outperforms Phenom II X2 X640 BE by a whopping 109% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Phenom II X2 X640 BE and Athlon X4 840 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2470 | 1891 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | 2x AMD Phenom II | 4x Athlon |
| Power efficiency | 2.10 | 3.04 |
| Architecture codename | Champlain (2010−2011) | Kaveri (2014−2015) |
| Release date | 12 May 2011 (13 years ago) | August 2014 (10 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Phenom II X2 X640 BE and Athlon X4 840 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.2 GHz | 3.8 GHz |
| Bus rate | 3600 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 256 KB | 256K |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 4 MB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 28 nm |
| Die size | no data | 245 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 72 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 2,411 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom II X2 X640 BE and Athlon X4 840 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 | no data | 1 |
| Socket | S1 | Socket FM2+ |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 65 watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X2 X640 BE and Athlon X4 840. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, 3DNow!, SSE1-3A, AMD64, Enhanced Virus Protection, Virtualization | no data |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| FMA | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom II X2 X640 BE and Athlon X4 840 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom II X2 X640 BE and Athlon X4 840. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Phenom II X2 X640 BE and Athlon X4 840.
| PCIe version | no data | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.00 | 2.09 |
| Recency | 12 May 2011 | on August 2014 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
| Threads | 2 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 28 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 45 Watt | 65 Watt |
Phenom II X2 X640 BE has 44.4% lower power consumption.
Athlon X4 840, on the other hand, has a 109% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 60.7% more advanced lithography process.
The Athlon X4 840 is our recommended choice as it beats the Phenom II X2 X640 BE in performance tests.
Be aware that Phenom II X2 X640 BE is a notebook processor while Athlon X4 840 is a desktop one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X2 X640 BE and Athlon X4 840, 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.
