CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of M520 vs 450 among all CPUs

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

E 450
5.0
E 350
5.0
PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

E 450
6.7
E 350
6.7
PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics

E 450
n.d.
E 350
n.d.
Sky Diver and Cloud Gate

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing

E 450
5.1
E 350
5.0
CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?

E 450
6.1
E 350
6.1
Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

E 450
n.d.
E 350
n.d.
Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

7.4

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

E 450
7.4
E 350
7.4

Winner
AMD Turion II M520 

CPUBoss recommends the AMD Turion II M520  based on its performance and single-core performance.

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 Turion II M520

Reasons to consider the
AMD Turion II M520

Report a correction
Much better 3DMark06 CPU score 1,839 vs 18.4 Around 100x better 3DMark06 CPU score
Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score 91,800 MB/s vs 53,200 MB/s Around 75% better geekbench 3 AES single core score
Higher clock speed 2.3 GHz vs 1.65 GHz Around 40% higher clock speed
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
Lower typical power consumption 14.63W vs 28.44W Around 50% lower typical power consumption
Newer Aug, 2011 vs Sep, 2009 Release date over 1 years later
Lower annual home energy cost 4.34 $/year vs 8.43 $/year Around 50% lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 15.77 $/year vs 30.66 $/year Around 50% lower annual commercial energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Turion II M520 vs E 450

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

E 450
1,127

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

E 450
642

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Turion II M520
91,800 MB/s
E 450
53,200 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

E 450
1,056

GeekBench

E 450
2,017

3D Mark 06 (CPU)

E 450
18.4

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

E 450
770

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Turion II M520  vs
E 450 
Clock speed 2.3 GHz 1.65 GHz
Cores Dual core Dual core
Socket type
S1
Super 7
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 400 MHz 100 MHz

details

Turion II M520  vs
E 450 
Threads 2 2
L2 cache 1 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nm 40 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

integrated graphics

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

power consumption

TDP 35W 18W
Annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year 4.34 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year 15.77 $/year
Performance per watt 2.51 pt/W 2.98 pt/W
Typical power consumption 28.44W 14.63W
AMD Turion II M520
Report a correction
AMD E 450
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus