Featured Articles

Analysts expect ARM to do well next year

Analysts expect ARM to do well next year

British chip designer ARM could cash in on the mobile industry's rush to transition to 64-bit operating systems and hardware.

More...
Huawei and Xiaomi outpace Lenovo, LG in smartphone market

Huawei and Xiaomi outpace Lenovo, LG in smartphone market

Samsung has lost smartphone market share, ending the quarter on a low note and Xiaomi appears to be the big winner.

More...
Intel Broadwell 15W coming to CES

Intel Broadwell 15W coming to CES

It looks like Intel will be showing off its 14nm processors, codenames Broadwell, in a couple of weeks at CES 2015.

More...
Gainward GTX 980 Phantom reviewed

Gainward GTX 980 Phantom reviewed

Today we’ll be taking a closer look at the recently introduced Gainward GTX 980 4GB with the company’s trademark Phantom cooler.

More...
Zotac ZBOX Sphere OI520 barebones vs Sphere Plus review

Zotac ZBOX Sphere OI520 barebones vs Sphere Plus review

Zotac has been in the nettop and mini-PC space for more than four years now and it has managed to carve…

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