CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 450 vs K125 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

7.4

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
AMD Athlon II Neo K125 

CPUBoss recommends the AMD Athlon II Neo K125  based on its performance, single-core 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

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of AMD E 450

Reasons to consider the
AMD E 450

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Newer manufacturing process 40 nm vs 45 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
More cores 2 vs 1 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Newer Aug, 2011 vs May, 2010 Release date over 1 years later
Front view of AMD Athlon II Neo K125

Reasons to consider the
AMD Athlon II Neo K125

Report a correction
Much better 3DMark06 CPU score 735 vs 18.4 Around 40x better 3DMark06 CPU score
Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score 67,000 MB/s vs 53,200 MB/s More than 25% better geekbench 3 AES single core score
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Better performance per watt 4.54 pt/W vs 2.98 pt/W More than 50% better performance per watt
Lower typical power consumption 9.75W vs 14.63W Around 35% lower typical power consumption
Lower annual commercial energy cost 10.51 $/year vs 15.77 $/year Around 35% lower annual commercial energy cost
Lower annual home energy cost 2.89 $/year vs 4.34 $/year Around 35% lower annual home energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of E 450 vs Athlon II Neo K125

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

E 450
53,200 MB/s
Athlon II Neo K125
67,000 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench

3D Mark 06 (CPU)

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

E 450  vs
Athlon II Neo K125 
Clock speed 1.65 GHz 1.7 GHz
Cores Dual core Single core
Socket type
Super 7
S1
Is unlocked No No

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
MMX
SSE3
SSE
AMD64
AMD-V
3DNow!
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

bus

Clock speed 100 MHz 1,000 MHz

details

E 450  vs
Athlon II Neo K125 
Threads 2 1
L2 cache 1 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 40 nm 45 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Radeon™ HD 6320 N/A
Latest DirectX 11.0 N/A
GPU clock speed 508 MHz N/A
Turbo clock speed 600 MHz N/A

power consumption

TDP 18W 12W
Annual home energy cost 4.34 $/year 2.89 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 15.77 $/year 10.51 $/year
Performance per watt 2.98 pt/W 4.54 pt/W
Typical power consumption 14.63W 9.75W
AMD E 450
Report a correction
AMD Athlon II Neo K125
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus