Efficiency Analysis: Atom D510 Vs. Atom D525/ION2

Features
By ,
published

Intel's Atom D525 offers a faster clock rate than its predecessor at the same 13 W TDP. Obviously, the new dual-core chip is going to be faster. But after we determined that the Core i3 is more efficient, can Atom D525 usurp the desktop contender?

In The Red Corner: Atom D510

Intel D510MO

For this comparison, we decided to use an Intel D510MO motherboard, a popular product for low-power, small form factor computers. Chris Angelini utilized this platform and discussed it in detail for his article Intel's Atom D510 And NM10 Express: Down The Pine Trail With D510MO.

While Jetway's Atom D525 has a mini PCI Express slot, the Intel D510MO comes with a 32-bit PCI legacy interface. In addition, the board has four USB 2.0 ports and a gigabit Ethernet port. Unfortunately, you can only use an analog VGA connector for displays, which is a bit cheaper than implementing DVI, HDMI, or DisplayPort. Client systems are typically better off with one of the digital monitor interfaces. This motherboard and the Atom D510 still utilize DDR2-800 memory, and we used two 2 GB DIMMs to reach a total memory of 4 GB.

Image 1 of 3

Test System Data:

Swipe to scroll horizontally
HardwareDetails
MotherboardIntel D510MO (Rev. 1.0), Chipset: Intel NM10, BIOS: 0175 (03/8/2010)
CPUIntel Atom D510 (45 nm, 1.66 GHz, 1 MB L2 Cache, TDP 13 W)
RAM DDR2 (dual)2 x 2 GB DDR2-800 (Apogee AU2G732-12GH001)
Hard DriveSeagate Barracuda 7200.11, 500 GB (ST3500320AS) 7200 RPM, SATA 3Gb/s, 32 MB Cache
Power SupplyEnermax Pro 82+, EPR425AWT
Operating SystemWindows 7 Ultimate x64, Updated on 2010-03-03
Intel Chipset DriversChipset Installation Utility Ver. 9.1.1.1025
Intel Storage DriversMatrix Storage Drivers Ver. 8.​9.​0.​1023
Intel GraphicsIntel Graphics Media Accelerator 15.17
Achim Roos
Achim Roos
35 Comments Comment from the forums
  • darthvidor
    very nice, thank you. been wondering how fast and energy efficient the new atom is. might replace the intel d945gclf2 connected to my tv.
    Reply
  • Scanlia
    Thanks... now I know that a D525 is better than the D510... I thought a higher number means that it's slower... .
    Reply
  • Simple11
    Sweet! I am always looking at atoms+ion combos for my Carputer build!
    Reply
  • Gin Fushicho
    I just skipped to the power consumption after I saw the application benches.

    I'd rather keep the D510 over a D525. Longer battery life for my simple purpose of web browsing.
    Reply
  • super_tycoon
    i don't think you guys even tried using the d525/ion2 system for anything beyond the benchmarks. you greatly underestimate how usable it is. my asus 1215n chugs along just fine in almost any game. obviously you wouldn't want to throw something like civ5 at it, but in reality the combo plays games better than (for the most part) any iX notebook with integrated graphics. it plays company of heroes and starcraft 2 just fine at lowered settings. i'd bet you'd be surprised how viable it is as a light gaming platform for something that uses as much power as your monitor.
    Reply
  • jeremypv
    >>This could not be done without Nvidia's graphics unit, as even 720p video was impossible to watch on the Atom D510.

    I'm using xbmc with a D510, and it plays 720p video just fine, with coreavc, it can even play a few 1080p videos
    Reply
  • ta152h
    Was this supposed to be about the Ion, or the D525? Why would you write an article with the intent to compare two processors, and put them on very different platforms?

    I didn't even read this worthless article after I saw that. It would have been interesting had the reviewers used some common sense.
    Reply
  • JonnyDough
    Except for power savings...why would anyone buy one of these when you can get recycled PCs for almost free? In six months they will have something a lot better anyway.
    Reply
  • sudeshc
    nice article, but i feel there is still need for alot of improvements
    Reply
  • SteelCity1981
    I don't get why intel still hasn't made the transition to 32nm for the Atoms yet. You would think these chips would have been the first to get 32nm.
    Reply