Wednesday, 25 May 2011 11:02

AMD E-350 vs Intel Atom D525+ION2

Written by Eliot Kucharik

E-350_vs_D525_ASRock_front_small top-value-2008-lr

Review:
Intel Atom is still dead

 


After our first E-350 Brazos review some of our readers were outraged that we have used Windows XP instead of Windows 7. More importantly we had no time to get an Intel D525 board with ION2, which would be a more serious match instead of the Atom 330+ION we were forced to use. Today we got an Zotac ITXION-S which uses an Atom D525 and an ION2. It's the same chip found on the G210 with 16 shaders and clocks with 535MHz for the core and 1230MHz for the shaders. The downside of any ION2 is the connection just with one PCIe x1 lane to the chipset, so limiting the bandwidth to a mere 250MB/s. To compensate for that, all boards include 512MB DDR3 memory, so the GPU has not go via the chipset to access memory which would hurt the performance. The internal graphics of the E-350 which is called Radeon 6310, consists of 80 cores but does only clock with 500MHz. While that may not be a problem for the majority of applications, the 500MHz clock also limits the UVD3 engine. The Atom D525 is clocked at 1.8GHz, has 2x 512kB 2nd level cache and both CPU cores are now on one die. The AMD E-350 clocks with 1.6GHz and has a also 2x 512kB L2 cache.

Ion2 GPUz



Testbed:

ASRock E350M1/USB3 (provided by ASRock)
AMD E-350/A50M
Zotac ITXION-S (provided by DiTech)
Intel Atom D525/NM10/nVidia G210M aka Ion2
ASRock Ion330-HT BD (provided by ASRock)
Intel Atom 330/iCH7/GeForce 9400M aka Ion


Memory:
G.Skill SO-DIMM 4GB Kit PC3-106667 (provided by G.Skill)
1067MHz CL8-8-8-23 CR1T 1.35V
G.Skill Eco 4GB Kit PC3-12800 (provided by G.Skill)
1333MHz CL7-7-7-20 CR1T 1.35V

Hard disk:
Mushkin Callisto Deluxe 60GB (provided by Mushkin)

Case:
ITX Case with 80W PSU found somewhere

OS:
Windows 7 Ultimate SP1 x64

  • «
  •  Start 
  •  Prev 
  •  1 
  •  2 
  •  3 
  •  4 
  •  5 
  •  6 
  •  Next 
  •  End 
  • »
(Page 1 of 6)
Last modified on Saturday, 28 May 2011 00:13
blog comments powered by Disqus

Comments  

 
+16 #1 bunker 2011-05-25 11:52
excuse me?

while i do like the benchmarks i don't like your conclusions AT ALL.
good thing you've added your results...

the E350 completely crushes both atoms in every benchmark other than dual threaded cinebench...

And i LOL'd at your conclusions the old atom uses 4Watts less in far cry. Sure, thats what the graph says, but the E350 accually doubles the 330's framrates. how can you honestly take that benchmark as a standard.

sigh...

maybe you should also add an efficiency score for far cry. that should be fun to watch you justify intel/nvidiass poor results there
 
 
+5 #2 Wolfesteinabhi 2011-05-25 12:03
AND YEAH this site clearly needs a PROOF READER! .. i read the sentence on first page thrice to understand that it actually is saying "512KB of Cache"

"The Atom D525 is clocked at 1.8GHz, has 2x 512MB 2nd Level Cache" LOL :D
 
 
+7 #3 The blue fox 2011-05-25 12:11
I don't understand Gaming bench marks on hardware like this. No one ever going to play games Other then Warcraft on this kind of hardware.
 
 
+8 #4 nele 2011-05-25 12:38
Quoting The blue fox:
I don't understand Gaming bench marks on hardware like this. No one ever going to play games Other then Warcraft on this kind of hardware.


Well it depends really... I'm getting a Fusion HTPC soon and since I'm not into console gaming (or any sort of gaming for that matter), I'm planning to install a few "oldies".

Of course, hardware won't be an issue for Worms or Angry Birds, but there's plenty of older games worth playing, for example some racing titles, fighting games, sports (mainly PES) - basically anything that can be fun with a couple of gamepads and a bunch of drunk people around...

I don't need a console, I just want to run some old, simple and silly games when I feel like it. :-)
 
 
+1 #5 eliot 2011-05-28 00:13
Quoting The blue fox:
I don't understand Gaming bench marks on hardware like this. No one ever going to play games Other then Warcraft on this kind of hardware.


LoL, in the last review I did not bother to include any games and many were outraged... So what is it what you want? If I do one game it's not ok, if I don't it's not ok either... make up your minds. ;-)
 
 
0 #6 eliot 2011-05-28 00:18
Quoting bunker:
excuse me?

while i do like the benchmarks i don't like your conclusions AT ALL.
good thing you've added your results...

the E350 completely crushes both atoms in every benchmark other than dual threaded cinebench...

And i LOL'd at your conclusions the old atom uses 4Watts less in far cry. Sure, thats what the graph says, but the E350 accually doubles the 330's framrates. how can you honestly take that benchmark as a standard.

sigh...

maybe you should also add an efficiency score for far cry. that should be fun to watch you justify intel/nvidiass poor results there


two week CPUs or CPU vs APU does not crash each other... While in WinRAR the difference is noticable (as a user) in any other application you won't notice. So there is no crushing involved. Crushing maybe a word to choose for the single-threaded performance which is still more important nowadays because most software besides games don't bother to utilize that potential. And something like Photoshop is a bit too much for such CPUs either. Even the x264 was just for the fun of it, not really to suggest to any user to do any encoding with it ;-)
 

To be able to post comments please log-in with Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments