AMD Athlon X2 450

The AMD Athlon X2 450 is a dual-core desktop processor from AMD’s Kaveri generation, built on the Steamroller architecture and a 28 nm process. It runs at a base clock of 3.50 GHz and boosts to 3.90 GHz, with a 65 W TDP. Benchmark data places it at the 4th percentile among all CPUs, with an average score of 378, putting it in the very low end of the performance spectrum. It is end-of-life, supports DDR3 memory on Socket FM2+, and lacks integrated graphics.

How It Compares

The Athlon X2 450 is statistically tied with its nearest rivals, all of which sit within a 0.5% performance delta. Against the Intel Core i3-370M, the Athlon trails by 0.2% in average benchmark score (378 vs 379). This is a negligible difference, effectively making the two processors interchangeable for everyday tasks. The i3-370M is a mobile chip, but the comparison shows that the Athlon’s desktop positioning does not translate into a meaningful advantage.

The AMD A6-5350M, another mobile part, is 0.3% ahead of the Athlon. Again, this is within noise, and the two AMD processors behave nearly identically in synthetic workloads. The A6-5350M includes integrated graphics, while the Athlon does not, but raw CPU performance is a dead heat.

The Intel Celeron 1037U, a low-power dual-core, is 0.4% behind the Athlon. The Athlon’s slight edge is too small to notice in real use. Both chips are aimed at entry-level desktops and thin clients, and the benchmark scores confirm they occupy the same performance class.

Finally, the Intel Core i5-2537M, a low-voltage mobile processor, is 0.5% slower than the Athlon. This is the largest delta among the rivals, but still under a single percentage point. The Athlon’s lead is essentially meaningless, especially given that the i5-2537M offers two cores and four threads, whereas the Athlon has only two threads. In practice, the Athlon X2 450 sits at the bottom of the desktop CPU hierarchy, and its rivals are all similarly dated low-end parts.

Power and Thermals

The Athlon X2 450 has a 65 W TDP, which is modest for a desktop processor. This power envelope implies that a basic air cooler—such as a stock AMD cooler or a low-profile third-party unit—is more than sufficient to keep it within safe temperatures. The 28 nm process and the relatively low clock speeds contribute to a low heat density, so thermal throttling is unlikely under normal operation. The unlocked multiplier allows for overclocking, but pushing the chip beyond its stock 3.90 GHz boost will increase power draw and heat output. Even so, the 65 W TDP leaves headroom for a mild overclock without requiring a high-end cooling solution. For a builder targeting a quiet, low-power system, the Athlon’s power characteristics are a plus, though the performance ceiling is low.

Who Should Consider It

The benchmark results make it clear that the Athlon X2 450 is not suitable for demanding workloads. In Cinebench R23, it scores 1100 points in multi-core and 155 in single-core; in R20, the scores are 462 multi-core and 65 single-core. These numbers place it in the bottom 4% of all CPUs. That means it is only appropriate for basic office tasks—word processing, spreadsheets, web browsing, and light email. It can handle legacy software that does not require modern instruction sets, but it will struggle with any multi-threaded application such as video encoding, 3D rendering, or modern web browsers with many open tabs. Gaming is out of the question for any recent title, as the single-thread performance is far too low to maintain playable frame rates. The Athlon could serve as a secondary machine for simple productivity or as a low-cost build for a user who only needs a web terminal. However, for anyone considering new purchases, the 4th percentile ranking and end-of-life status make it a poor choice for anything beyond the most basic use cases.

Platform and Compatibility

The Athlon X2 450 uses the AMD Socket FM2+ interface. It supports dual-channel DDR3 memory with a bandwidth of 29.9 GB/s, and does not support ECC memory. The processor provides PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), meaning a discrete graphics card can be connected directly to the CPU. There is no integrated graphics, so a separate GPU is mandatory for any display output. The multiplier is unlocked, allowing overclocking, but the platform is end-of-life, so no new motherboards are being produced for it. The upgrade path is limited to other FM2+ processors, most of which are also outdated. The chip was released on July 30, 2014, and its production status is end-of-life. For a builder with an existing FM2+ motherboard, the Athlon could be a cheap drop-in replacement, but for a new build, the lack of modern features—such as DDR4 support, PCIe Gen 4, or integrated graphics—makes the platform obsolete.

FAQ

Q: What socket does the Athlon X2 450 use?

A: It uses AMD Socket FM2+.

Q: Does it support ECC memory?

A: No, ECC memory is not supported.

Q: What is the TDP of the Athlon X2 450?

A: The TDP is 65 W.

Q: Does the processor have integrated graphics?

A: No, it has no integrated graphics; a discrete GPU is required.

Q: Is the multiplier unlocked?

A: Yes, the multiplier is unlocked, allowing overclocking.

Q: What is the boost clock speed?

A: The boost clock is 3.90 GHz, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz.

Single-Thread vs Multi-Thread Behavior

The Athlon X2 450 shows an unusual split between its single-thread and multi-thread scores. In Cinebench R20, the single-core score is 65, while the multi-core score is 462. In R23, the single-core score is 155 and the multi-core is 1100. In both cases, the multi-core score is roughly seven times the single-core score. For a processor with only two cores and two threads, this ratio is far higher than the expected 2x scaling. This indicates that the single-thread performance is disproportionately weak, while the multi-threaded execution, though still low in absolute terms, benefits from the chip’s architecture more than one would anticipate. The practical implication is that workloads that can use both cores will see relatively better performance than those that rely on a single core. However, both metrics are so low that the distinction is academic—the Athlon will feel sluggish in any modern application, regardless of thread count. The single-thread score of 155 in R23 is far below the threshold needed for responsive general-purpose computing, and the multi-core score of 1100 is equally inadequate for productivity tasks. This behavior suggests that the Steamroller architecture’s strength lies in its ability to scale with multiple threads, but the absolute performance ceiling is too low to matter for contemporary software.