Under idling conditions, the AMD system consumes 1.7 watts less than the Atom-embedded board from Intel. At only 38.8 watts, the Athlon 64 2000+ system breaks a new record for desktop systems in our lab.
Under full load conditions, the AMD processor remains a step ahead. With 2.3 watts less energy consumption, the Athlon 64 2000+ system beats Intel’s Atom-based board. At 41.9 watts under full load conditions, AMD also sets a new record in our lab.
When measuring the energy consumption of the entire system, AMD’s 8 watt processor performs better than Intel’s 4 watt processor, due to the lower power consumption of the chip set.
Test Platforms for Energy Consumption Measurements
| Processor | Platform |
|---|---|
| Athlon Sempron | AMD 780G Gigabyte GA-MA78GM-S2H |
| Pentium Dual Core | Intel G33 Gigabyte GA-G33-DS3R |
| Celeron | SIS 662 Intel D201GLY2 |
| Atom | Intel 945G ECS 945GCT-D |
| Hard Drive | Western Digital 3200AAJS 320GB, 7200 RPM, SATA300 |
Summary
- AMD Athlon 64 2000+ At 8 Watts
- AMD Athlon 64 vs. Intel Atom
- Chipset Comparison: AMD vs. Intel
- Cooling And Temperature
- System Power Consumption
- Processor Power Consumption
- Web Browsing Speed
- Real World Use: LAN, DVD And HD Speed
- Athlon 64 vs. Atom 230 vs. Celeron 220
- Test System, Drivers, Benchmarks, Settings
- Lame, iTunes, AVG, Winrar
- Cinema 4D, Fritz, PCMark
- SiSoft Sandra
- Conclusion: Athlon 64 Is More Economical, Faster, And Quieter
Sponsored
