Athlon II X2 215 vs Pentium G2010
Aggregate performance score
Pentium G2010 outperforms Athlon II X2 215 by an impressive 66% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Pentium G2010 and Athlon II X2 215 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2452 | 2781 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.01 | 8.66 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Power efficiency | 1.74 | 0.89 |
| Architecture codename | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) | Regor (2009−2013) |
| Release date | 21 January 2013 (11 years ago) | 20 October 2009 (15 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $466 | $45 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Athlon II X2 215 has 86500% better value for money than Pentium G2010.
Detailed specifications
Pentium G2010 and Athlon II X2 215 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 2.7 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 2.8 GHz | 2.7 GHz |
| Bus rate | 5 GT/s | no data |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 3072 KB (shared) | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 94 mm2 | 117 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 65 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 410 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Pentium G2010 and Athlon II X2 215 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 | 1 |
| Socket | FCLGA1155 | AM3 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Pentium G2010 and Athlon II X2 215. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2 | no data |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| My WiFi | - | no data |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | - | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
Security technologies
Pentium G2010 and Athlon II X2 215 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
| Secure Key | - | no data |
| Anti-Theft | - | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Pentium G2010 and Athlon II X2 215 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | - | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Pentium G2010 and Athlon II X2 215. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | 32 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 21 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® Processors | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |
| Graphics max frequency | 1.05 GHz | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Pentium G2010 and Athlon II X2 215 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 3 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Pentium G2010 and Athlon II X2 215.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | 2.0 |
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.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.01 | 0.61 |
| Recency | 21 January 2013 | 20 October 2009 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 65 Watt |
Pentium G2010 has a 65.6% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 3 years, a 104.5% more advanced lithography process, and 18.2% lower power consumption.
The Pentium G2010 is our recommended choice as it beats the Athlon II X2 215 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Pentium G2010 and Athlon II X2 215, 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.
