Featured Articles

TSMC: Volume production of 16nm FinFET in 2H 2015

TSMC: Volume production of 16nm FinFET in 2H 2015

TSMC has announced that it will begin volume production of 16nm FinFET products in the second half of 2015, in late…

More...
AMD misses earnings targets, announces layoffs

AMD misses earnings targets, announces layoffs

AMD has missed earnings targets and is planning a substantial job cuts. The company reported quarterly earnings yesterday and the street is…

More...
Did Google botch the Nexus 6 and Nexus 9?

Did Google botch the Nexus 6 and Nexus 9?

As expected, Google has finally released the eagerly awaited Nexus 6 phablet and its first 64-bit device, the Nexus 9 tablet.

More...
Gainward GTX 970 Phantom previewed

Gainward GTX 970 Phantom previewed

Nvidia has released two new graphics cards based on its latest Maxwell GPU architecture. The Geforce GTX 970 and Geforce GTX…

More...
EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0 reviewed

EVGA GTX 970 SC ACX 2.0 reviewed

Nvidia has released two new graphics cards based on its latest Maxwell GPU architecture. The Geforce GTX 970 and Geforce GTX…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Tuesday, 12 January 2010 02:29

AMD Athlon II X2 245 vs 240e dissected - 6 Conclusion

Written by Eliot Kucharik

Image Image

Review: Energy efficiency for the masses?




Before we can think of a conclusion we need to check the system costs and performance. While 100MHz do not count for much, it's clear a quad-core is superior, especially in games. The Athlon II X4 620 still outperforms any dual-core even when clocked 300MHz slower. Even when the dual-cores are overclocked to 3.80GHz, the cheapest AMD quad-core can still hold its ground and considering the power-consumption it offers far superior performance. For our system we choose the MSI 785GM-E65 board, the cheapest 4GB Kit for 1333MHz CL7 we could find and the cheapest HD4850 1GB which will result in a decent system.

Image


Conclusion:


Considering AMD's pricing for these CPUs, we must say that they perform rather well. However, energy efficient CPUs do cost about 30% more than regular versions. When you have a very cheap board which does not support any form of under-voltaging then this is the CPU to go. If you are gamer, we suggest you get a quad-core. Most games which come from the X-Box 360 and are ported to the PC-platform do support three cores, so an X3 435 for about €62,- is a better option. The downside on the three cores is the quite high power-consumption compared to any real X4. Of course some boards can unlock the fourth core, but you can never be sure it will work.

As long as you are a casual gamer, mostly surf the interweb, watch videos a dual-core is really not a bad choice. The Athlon II 245 is currently available just shy of €50,-, while the 240e costs about €64,-. Meanwhile, the Athlon II X4 620 dropped in price to about €77,- which is not bad either.

AMD has much work ahead. We think AMD could lower the TDP of all its CPUs by decreasing the VCore. As our under-voltaging tests prove there is quite a lot of headroom. The energy-efficient CPUs can go even lower as we have proven in our tests. We were impressed with the overclockability of the 240e, which also managed 3.80GHz but at a much lower VCore compared to the 245. From a price/performance point of view the Athlon II X4 620 is superior to any dual-core CPU and we still recommend it.



(Page 6 of 7)
Last modified on Friday, 24 September 2010 20:58
blog comments powered by Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments