Athlon Vs. Atom: Duel Of The Energy Savers

Features
By Bert Toepelt
published

Test System, Drivers, Benchmarks, Settings

Swipe to scroll horizontally
Components Details
AMD MotherboardAsus M2N32-SLI Deluxe, Rev 1.03G nVidia nForce5, BIOS: 1001 (03/13/2007)
AMD 780G MotherboardMSI K9A2GM-FD/FIH AMD 780G, BIOS: 1.4 (04/06/2008)
Intel MotherboardGigabyte GA-EP35C-DS3R Rev 2.1 Intel P35, BIOS: F3e (03/27/2008)
ITX Intel Celeron 220Intel D201GLY2 SIS 626, BIOS: 0137 (01/04/2008)
Memory2x 1GB A-DATA DDR2-1066+ Vitesta Extreme Edition TakeMS 1x 2GB
DVD-ROMSamsung SH-D163A, SATA150
Graphics CardFoxconn nVidia GeForce 8800 GTX GPU: 575 MHz Shader: 1350 MHz Memory: 786 MB DDR4 (900 MHz, 384 bit)
Sound CardCreative Labs Sound Blaster X-Fi XtremeGamer
Power SupplyCoolermaster RS850-EMBA, ATX 2.2, 850 W
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Component Details
Operating SystemWindows Vista Enterprise Version 6.0 (Build 6000) Windows XP SP2 VL
DirectX 10DirectX 10 (Vista Default)
DirectX 9Version: April 2007
SoundcardVista Driver 2.13.0012 (15.03.2007)
Soundcard - AtomVista Driver VIA HD V5.30.32.080228
Graphics DrivernVidia ForceWare Version 158.18 (32 Bit) WHQL
Intel X38 ChipsetVersion 8.1.1.1010 (21.11.2006)
Intel Atom ChipsetVersion 8.2.0.1008
nVidia Chipset DrivernForce Driver: 15.00 (02.02.2007) WHQL
82945G Express - AtomVersion 15.8.2.64.1461 (03.01.2008)
Intel G33 ExpressVersion 15.9.0.1472
JavaJava Runtime Environment 6.0 Update 1
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Benchmark Details
iTunes 7.2Version: 7.1.1.5 Audio CD (Terminator II SE), 53 min High Quality (160 kbps)
Lame MP3Version 3.98 Beta 3 (05.22.2007) Audio CD Terminator II SE, 53 min wave to mp3 160 kbps
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Benchmark Details
Grisoft AVG Anti-VirusVersion: 7.5.467 Virus base: 269.6.1/776 Benchmark Scan: Vista Enterprise (Windows folder) 8 GB
WinRARVersion 3.70 Beta 8 Compression = Best Dictionary = 4096 kB Benchmark: THG-Workload
Maxon Cinema 4D Release 10Version 10.008 Rendering from a scene (Water drop at a rose) Resolution: 1280 x 1024 - 8 Bit (50 frames)
Deep Fritz 10Version: Nov 16 2006
Swipe to scroll horizontally
Benchmark Details
PCMark05 ProVersion 1.2.0 CPU and Memory Tests Windows Media Player 10.00.00.3646 Windows Media Encoder 9.00.00.2980
SiSoftware Sandra XI SP1cCPU Test = CPU Arithmetic / MultiMedia Memory Test = Bandwidth Benchmark
Bert Toepelt
89 Comments Comment from the forums
  • tai_anjing_lu
    Yeah Tom's now AMD/ATI fanboy
    Reply
  • wh3resmycar
    oh please, spare me those kind of crap...

    clearly the 780g platforms owns any nvidia/intel chipset to date.

    about the article:

    this is a winner, i mean this is like the ultimate HTPC setup you can ever have.no heat/power worries just plain movie enjoyment :D
    Reply
  • tai_anjing_lu
    Believe it or not, my Sempron 1100 OC could kill the ugly Intel Q9550+ :lol
    Reply
  • photoguru
    wow... good choices for matching mobos... why even take the time to write these articles? If you're comparing HTPCs that are low cost, efficient, and fast enough for encoding and decoding then do it with the right gear. Don't tell me that an ultra mobile processor just got pwned by a desktop chip unless they figured out how to make that desktop chip fit in an ultra mobile form factor.

    It doesn't make sense to compare them on those terms unless your entire argument is based on wattage and not actual form factor performance.

    I will say that it would be interesting to find out what combination of low cost parts makes the most reasonable HTPC as far as performance/cost goes (with watts and temps included in case we could passively cool these babies).
    Reply
  • barathn
    Nice article.. surprising to see AMD doing better than Intel ATOM
    Reply
  • guusdekler
    Tom's choice of AMD hardware is a bit shortsighted in my opinion.
    There exist a lot more options that the matx board of his choice.

    Let me name some of the MINI-ITX boards there are for AMD AM2 AM2+:
    - Albatron KI690-AM2
    - AOpen NMCP68ST-LA
    - JetWay NC62K-LF
    - MSI Fuzzy 690T

    Allricht they employ a different chipset than the 780G but still very competetive as i derive this information from a dutch hardware magazine that tested these boards against intel's solution and especially the AOpen and MSI boards beat the crap out of intel's D201GLY2 board.
    Reply
  • apache_lives
    see this is what AMD is all about!!!!!!!!!!!

    Intel - produces first generation, limited, expensive and unflexible setups, AMD creates a cheaper flexible option for the masses, which kicks Intel back in line.

    This opens the low power platform up to all new ideas, and allows vista to run properly thanks to the video performance etc, and ram support.

    Nice one AMD!
    Reply
  • Wow! great, I hope next time, in 45 nm AMD will bring 2 phenom in one socket and become the new Phenom X8(like Intel pentium D) its just kick the new Intel Core i7. He, he, he...
    Reply
  • venteras
    I agree with photoguru, this is a pointless comparison. If you don't use the same form factor, i.e. mini-itx for both of them then what's the point? Unless if you want to disregard size and only compare performance/watt. However, since the whole point of the ATOM is to go 'smaller'... yeah, whatever.
    Reply
  • nottheking
    I must say I'm a bit surprised at the results. It's good to see that perhaps there's more life (and use) left in Athlon64s than we'd previously thought, if they make ideal low-power CPUs. Likewise, it's a surprise to find a place where AMD trumps Intel in the performance-per-watt sector, which is always important; I can perhaps imagining chips like the 2000+ and Atom being used for low-maintenance servers and datacenters, where PPW has always outweighed raw performance, since it's infinitely easier to buy more chips than to upgrade the local power grid.

    Now, if only Intel would develop an Atom-specific chipset that didn't consume copious amounts of memory. If AMD can get low-end GPU power sufficient for high-def decoding (regardless of what the CPU is) in under a single watt, certainly Intel could make a chipset that can handle all that is done by the 945GC and its laughable GMA 950 in even less power, since we're talking a less-complex design that has considerably less graphics power on hand, as well as the fact that Intel has access to 45nm production right now, while AMD is still stuck with 55nm. If only the chipset for an Atom didn't have several times the thermal envelope of the CPU...
    Reply