Performance: Compared to 2.40 GHz
If we compare the performance of the Phenom X3 at the same clock rate with a Phenom X4 and a traditional Athlon 64 X2, the benefits of a tri-core processor are shown clearly by the course of benchmark tests.
The Phenom with four cores is 6% faster than the Phenom with three CPU cores at the same clock rate. However, under full load, it requires 36% more energy and costs approximately 10 euros more. When compared to the traditional Athlon 64 X2, the Phenom X3 is roughly 23% faster due to its greater efficiency and the additional CPU core.
4
Comments
Sponsored
Latest CPU News
- 24/05 – Nvidia to Push Tablet Prices to $199 With Kai Platform
- 23/05 – AMD Backing Out of CPU Speed Wars Against Intel
- 22/05 – AMD Hitting The Casino Floor With Embedded R-Series
- 22/05 – Does Your AMD FX Platform BSOD with Steam? Read This.
- 20/05 – Intel To Support Cheap Ultrabooks With Low-Cost Celerons
Latest CPU reviews
- 24/05 – Overclocking Core i7-3770K: Learning To Live With Compromise
- 22/05 – Core i5-3570K, -3550, -3550S, And -3570T: Ivy Bridge Efficiency
- 15/05 – AMD A10-4600M Review: Mobile Trinity Gets Tested
- 14/05 – Core i7-3720QM: Ivy Bridge Makes Its Mark On Mobility
- 23/04 – Intel Core i7-3770K Review: A Small Step Up From Sandy Bridge
Page 12: Doesn't that diagram show the Core2 as being slower, not the AMD?
Cartwheel?
Is that like Spider, but in a pen?
^lol
And Page 12 is certainly borked - you guys were looking at the results wrong!
And you should have emphasized the X3s encoding-power-for-cheap more. Yeah, it's good for office and media/HD, but you can happily stick a G2 4000+ into a 780G board for much the same effect at a much lower cost, owing to the chipset's unholy knack for HD-crunching