Select any two CPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Athlon II X2 220 Athlon 64 FX-53
Cyberpunk 2077 456% 698%
Hitman 3 648% 974%
Assassins Creed: Valhalla 648% 974%
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War 438% 673%
FIFA 21 420% 646%
Grand Theft Auto VI 813% 1211%
Far Cry 6 776% 1158%
Genshin Impact 321% 504%
Battlefield 6 677% 1016%
Resident Evil 8 517% 786%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the AMD Athlon II X2 220 is noticeably better than the AMD Athlon 64 FX-53 when it comes to running the latest games. This also means it will be less likely to bottleneck more powerful GPUs, allowing them to achieve more of their gaming performance potential.

The Athlon II X2 was released over three years more recently than the Athlon 64 FX-53, and so the Athlon II X2 is likely to have far better levels of support, and will be much more optimized and ultimately superior to the Athlon 64 FX-53 when running the latest games.

The Athlon II X2 has 1 more core than the Athlon 64 FX-53. However, while the Athlon II X2 will probably perform better than the Athlon 64 FX-53, both CPUs are likely to struggle with the latest games, and will almost certainly bottleneck high-end graphics cards. This should not affect games that are a few years old, and even the latest games should at least be playable on very low settings, as only recently have game developers begun to harness the power of multiple cores.

More important for gaming than the number of cores and threads is the clock rate. Problematically, unless the two CPUs are from the same family, this can only serve as a general guide and nothing like an exact comparison, because the clock cycles per instruction (CPI) will vary so much.

The Athlon II X2 and Athlon 64 FX-53 are not from the same family of CPUs, so their clock speeds are by no means directly comparable. Bear in mind, then, that while the Athlon II X2 has a 0.4 GHz faster frequency, this is not always an indicator that it will be superior in performance, despite frequency being crucial when trying to avoid GPU bottlenecking. In this case, however, the difference is enough that it possibly indicates the superiority of the Athlon II X2.

Aside from the clock rate, the next-most important CPU features for PC game performance are L2 and L3 cache size. Faster than RAM, the more cache available, the more data that can be stored for lightning-fast retrieval. L1 Cache is not usually an issue anymore for gaming, with most high-end CPUs eking out about the same L1 performance, and L2 is more important than L3 - but L3 is still important if you want to reach the highest levels of performance. Bear in mind that although it is better to have a larger cache, the larger it is, the higher the latency, so a balance has to be struck.

The Athlon II X2 and the Athlon 64 FX-53 have the same L2 cache size, and neither CPU appears to have an L3 cache. In this case, the Athlon II X2 has a 128 KB bigger L1 cache, so would probably provide better performance than the Athlon 64 FX-53, at least in this area.

The maximum Thermal Design Power is the power in Watts that the CPU will consume in the worst case scenario. The lithography is the semiconductor manufacturing technology being used to create the CPU - the smaller this is, the more transistors that can be fit into the CPU, and the closer the connections. For both the lithography and the TDP, it is the lower the better, because a lower number means a lower amount of power is necessary to run the CPU, and consequently a lower amount of heat is produced.

The Athlon II X2 has a 24 Watt lower Maximum TDP than the Athlon 64 FX-53, and was created with a 85 nm smaller manufacturing technology. What this means is the Athlon II X2 will consume significantly less power and consequently produce less heat, enabling more prolonged computational tasks with fewer adverse effects. This will lower your yearly electricity bill significantly, as well as prevent you from having to invest in extra cooling mechanisms (unless you overclock).

CPU Core Details

CPU CodenameRegorSledgeHammer
MoBo SocketSocket AM2+ / AM3Socket 939
Notebook CPUnono
Release Date01 Jul 201001 Jun 2004
CPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved

CPU Technical Specifications

CPU Cores2vs1
CPU Threads-vs1
Clock Speed2.8 GHzvs2.4 GHz
Turbo Frequency-vs-
Max TDP65 Wvs89 W
Lithography45 nmvs130 nm
Bit Width-vs64 Bit
Max Temperature-vs70°C
Virtualization Technologynovsno
Comparison

CPU Cache and Memory

L1 Cache Size256 KBvs128 KB
L2 Cache Size1024 KBvs1024 KB
L3 Cache Size-vs-
ECC Memory Supportnovsno
Comparison

CPU Graphics

Graphicsno
Base GPU Frequency-vs-
Max GPU Frequency-vs-
DirectX-vs-
Displays Supported-vs-
Comparison

CPU Package and Version Specifications

Package Size-vs-
Revision-vs-
PCIe Revision-vs-
PCIe Configurations-vs-

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

CPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewThe Athlon II series is based on the AMD K10 architecture and derived from the Phenom II series. However, unlike its Phenom siblings, it does not contain any L3 Cache. There are two Athlon II dies: the dual-core Regor die with 1 MB L2 Cache per core and the four-core Propus with 512 KB per core. Regor is a native dual-core design with lower TDP and additional L2 to offset the removal of L3 cache. The three core Rana is derived from the Propus quad-core design, with one core disabled.Athlon 64 FX-53 is an entry-level Processor based on the 130nm K8 micro-architecture.

It offers 1 Physical Core (1 Logical), clocked at 2.4GHz and 1MB of L2 Cache.
No relevant technologies are activated in a way the processor doesn't even support Virtualization.

The processor DOES NOT integrate any graphics. and has a rated board TDP of 89W.

Its performance is below the average and so most demanding games will not run optimally.