CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 1600 vs 1450 among all CPUs

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics

Sky Diver and Cloud Gate

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing

CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

8.2

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
AMD A6 1450 

CPUBoss recommends the AMD A6 1450  based on its performance and power consumption.

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS
Front view of AMD A6 1450

AMD A6 1450

CPUBoss Winner

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of AMD Athlon 1600

Reasons to consider the
AMD Athlon 1600

Report a correction
Significantly higher clock speed 2.2 GHz vs 1 GHz Around 2.2x higher clock speed
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Slightly better PassMark (Single core) score 635 vs 503 More than 25% better PassMark (Single core) score
Front view of AMD A6 1450

Reasons to consider the
AMD A6 1450

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 28 nm vs 90 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Significantly more l2 cache 2 MB vs 1 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much better performance per watt 24.73 pt/W vs 1.05 pt/W Around 23.8x better performance per watt
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Significantly lower typical power consumption 6.5W vs 36.56W 5.6x lower typical power consumption
Much higher Maximum operating temperature 90 °C vs 55 °C Around 65% higher Maximum operating temperature
More cores 4 vs 1 3 more cores; run more applications at once
More threads 4 vs 1 3 more threads
Slightly better PassMark score 1,526 vs 561 Around 2.8x better PassMark score
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 1.93 $/year vs 10.84 $/year 5.6x lower annual home energy cost
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 7.01 $/year vs 39.42 $/year 5.6x lower annual commercial energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Athlon 1600 vs A6 1450

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Athlon 1600
1,012
A6 1450
1,935

GeekBench

Athlon 1600
2,006
A6 1450
1,935

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

A6 1450
1,526

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Athlon 1600  vs
A6 1450 
Clock speed 2.2 GHz 1 GHz
Cores Single core Quad core
Is unlocked No No

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
F16C
MMX
AVX
SSE3
SSE
BMI1
AMD64
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
AMD-V
3DNow!
Supplemental SSE3
AES

details

Athlon 1600  vs
A6 1450 
Threads 1 4
L2 cache 1 MB 2 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 90 nm 28 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Operating temperature Unknown - 55°C Unknown - 90°C

integrated graphics

GPU None GPU
Label N/A Radeon™ HD 8250
Latest DirectX N/A 11.0
GPU clock speed N/A 300 MHz
Turbo clock speed N/A 400 MHz

power consumption

TDP 45W 8W
Annual home energy cost 10.84 $/year 1.93 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 39.42 $/year 7.01 $/year
Performance per watt 1.05 pt/W 24.73 pt/W
Typical power consumption 36.56W 6.5W
AMD Athlon 1600
Report a correction
AMD A6 1450
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus