Page 1:Atom Just Isn’t For Desktops
Page 2:Atom or Core 2?
Page 3:Intel Atom: ECS 945GCT-D
Page 4:Core 2 Duo E7200 and Foxconn G31MG-S
Page 5:The Power Supply Matters!
Page 6:Power Consumption With Different PSUs
Page 7:Test Setup and Benchmarks
Page 8:Application Benchmark Results
Page 9:Synthetic Benchmark Results
Page 10:SYSmark 2004 Results
Page 11:Power Consumption
Page 12:Efficiency and Performance per Watt
Application Benchmark Results
As expected, Core 2 Duo is many times faster than the Atom 230 for popular applications:
6.1x more performance for the 2.53 GHz Core 2 Duo in Cinebench R10.
Converting WAV audio into Apple’s AAC audio format for iPod utilization takes more than three times longer with the Atom 230 than it does with the Core 2 Duo E7200.
Converting WAV audio into the MP3 format takes almost four times as long with the Atom 230 as it does with the Core 2 Duo E7200.
Compressing files on WinRAR took almost three times more time with the Atom system.
WinZIP isn’t thread-optimized, which is the reason why the Atom 230 appears to be faster. Still, it takes more than twice as much time to complete this workload.
- Atom Just Isn’t For Desktops
- Atom or Core 2?
- Intel Atom: ECS 945GCT-D
- Core 2 Duo E7200 and Foxconn G31MG-S
- The Power Supply Matters!
- Power Consumption With Different PSUs
- Test Setup and Benchmarks
- Application Benchmark Results
- Synthetic Benchmark Results
- SYSmark 2004 Results
- Power Consumption
- Efficiency and Performance per Watt