Hardware Secrets Forums


Go Back   Hardware Secrets Forums > Miscellaneous > Content Comments



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10-20-2009, 04:12 PM   #1
Hardware Secrets Team
Administrator
 
Join Date Nov 2004
Posts: 5,578
Hardware Secrets Team is on a distinguished road

Default Athlon II X2 240e and Athlon II X3 435 CPU Review

There has been a new article posted.

Title: Athlon II X2 240e and Athlon II X3 435 CPU Review
URL: http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/843

Here is a snippet:
"Today AMD is launching several entry-level 45-nm socket AM3 Athlon II CPUs and we are going to take a look on the new Athlon II X2 240e (2.8 GHz) and Athlon II X3 435 (2.9 GHz) CPUs and compare them t..."

Comments on this article are welcome.

Best regards,
Hardware Secrets Team
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com
Hardware Secrets Team is offline   Reply With Quote
new Sponsored Links

Old 10-20-2009, 11:18 PM   #2
Olle P
Senior Member
 
Olle P's Avatar
 
Join Date Oct 2008
Sweden
Posts: 1,736
Olle P is on a distinguished road

Default

You're absolutely correct in the page 1 discussion about comparing apples to pears. I don't even think there are any good fit-all Intel equivalents for these new CPUs.
BTW, I'm a bit puzzled by the choice to use motherboards with on board graphics. Simply using mobos without graphics should provide an even more equal setup.

While reading through the review I concentrated on pseudo-analysing the differences in performance in-between the Athlons, to find variations depending on number of cores and/or clock speeds. (I failed to reach any sensible conclusion.)

Then I realised that there's another potentially huge factor, not mentioned in the review, to take into account: Power consumption.
The Intel CPUs all have a TDP of 65W. X2 240e has a TDP of 45W while X3 435 and X4 620 have a TDP of 95W.

Building an extremely quiet and/or small computer you really want the best performance per watt, and out of the tested CPUs I'd say the X2 240e win that fight. (A comparison to the other "e" models launched now would be very nice.)

Cheers
Olle
Olle P is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-27-2009, 07:48 AM   #3
Gabriel Torres
Administrator
 
Gabriel Torres's Avatar
 
Join Date Oct 2004
USA
Posts: 4,415
Gabriel Torres is on a distinguished road

Default

Hello Olle P,

Here are some comments.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Olle P View Post
You're absolutely correct in the page 1 discussion about comparing apples to pears. I don't even think there are any good fit-all Intel equivalents for these new CPUs.
Thanks. There are a lot of websites out there that are not getting this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Olle P View Post
BTW, I'm a bit puzzled by the choice to use motherboards with on board graphics. Simply using mobos without graphics should provide an even more equal setup.
AMD told us that they are promoting these CPUs to be used with AMD785G-based motherboards due to their price range, and this was why we picked motherboard with on-board graphics. On the other hand, we know that users will prefer to run these CPUs on a motherboard without on-board graphics, and that is why we installed a GeForce 9600 GT, this way we covered both grounds.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Olle P View Post
While reading through the review I concentrated on pseudo-analysing the differences in performance in-between the Athlons, to find variations depending on number of cores and/or clock speeds. (I failed to reach any sensible conclusion.)
It depends on the program. Each program uses more one feature than the other. For example, on Cinebench the number of cores and then the clock rate is what matters. On other programs, the clock rate is what matters the most. And on others the size of L2 cache.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Olle P View Post
Then I realised that there's another potentially huge factor, not mentioned in the review, to take into account: Power consumption. The Intel CPUs all have a TDP of 65W. X2 240e has a TDP of 45W while X3 435 and X4 620 have a TDP of 95W.
You are right. We didn't touch this subject.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Olle P View Post
Building an extremely quiet and/or small computer you really want the best performance per watt, and out of the tested CPUs I'd say the X2 240e win that fight. (A comparison to the other "e" models launched now would be very nice.)
Perfect conclusion.

Thanks for your comments,
Gabriel Torres
__________________
Editor-in-Chief
Hardware Secrets
http://www.hardwaresecrets.com
Gabriel Torres is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2010, 06:12 AM   #4
lorddais
Junior Member
 
Join Date Jan 2010
Posts: 4
lorddais is on a distinguished road

Default sorry to nitpick

In your tables you show the 240e with 512KB per core. In the interests of accuracy I must point out that other reviews state the each core gets a full MB in the dual core processor while the x3 and x4 only receive the 512kb per core. I realize this was probably a typo, but in a comparison such as this I feel it is worth noting.

Also while doing a price comparison is good for bargain shopping, I think what most people were looking for was a performance based comparison, such as if my program recommends using a 3G P4 will the AMD 240e meet that spec and if I save money in the process then great deal. In that respect I would have liked to see the new chips compared to Intel dual core processors of similar voltage and memory capacities.

Last edited by lorddais; 01-28-2010 at 06:24 AM.
lorddais is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-28-2010, 07:07 AM   #5
Cheetos
Senior Member
 
Cheetos's Avatar
 
Join Date Jun 2008
Brazil
Posts: 426
Cheetos is on a distinguished road

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lorddais View Post
In your tables you show the 240e with 512KB per core. In the interests of accuracy I must point out that other reviews state the each core gets a full MB in the dual core processor while the x3 and x4 only receive the 512kb per core. I realize this was probably a typo, but in a comparison such as this I feel it is worth noting.

Also while doing a price comparison is good for bargain shopping, I think what most people were looking for was a performance based comparison, such as if my program recommends using a 3G P4 will the AMD 240e meet that spec and if I save money in the process then great deal. In that respect I would have liked to see the new chips compared to Intel dual core processors of similar voltage and memory capacities.
Lorddais, the voltage, clock and cache aren't a good parameter to compare CPUs because they are very different in the modus operandi.

That's why Hardware Secrets uses the price range to choose the contenders in a test.
__________________
Goodbye, and thanks for all the fish !
Cheetos is offline   Reply With Quote
new Sponsored Links

Reply

Share This Thread

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:25 PM.


vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd. ()
2004-12, Hardware Secrets, LLC. All rights reserved.