Athlon 64 FX-76 vs Athlon 64 FX-51

Primary details

Comparing Athlon 64 FX-51 and Athlon 64 FX-76 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Architecture codenameSledgeHammer (2003−2005)Windsor (2006−2007)
Release dateSeptember 2003 (21 year ago)November 2006 (18 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Athlon 64 FX-51 and Athlon 64 FX-76 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads12
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz3.2 GHz
L1 cache128 KB128 KB
L2 cache1 MB1 MB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography130 nm90 nm
Die size193 mm2235 mm2
Number of transistors105 million227 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Athlon 64 FX-51 and Athlon 64 FX-76 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
Socket940F
Power consumption (TDP)89 Watt125 Watt

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 FX-51 and Athlon 64 FX-76. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR1

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 1 2
Threads 1 2
Chip lithography 130 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 89 Watt 125 Watt

Athlon 64 FX-51 has 40.4% lower power consumption.

Athlon 64 FX-76, on the other hand, has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and a 44.4% more advanced lithography process.

We couldn't decide between Athlon 64 FX-51 and Athlon 64 FX-76. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 FX-51 and Athlon 64 FX-76, 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 FX-51
Athlon 64 FX-51
AMD Athlon 64 FX-76
Athlon 64 FX-76

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.


5 1 vote

Rate Athlon 64 FX-51 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
5 2 votes

Rate Athlon 64 FX-76 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Athlon 64 FX-51 or Athlon 64 FX-76, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.