CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 230 vs 2100

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

Atom 230
5.2
E1 2100
5.3
Passmark and GeekBench (32-bit)

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

Atom 230
5.5
E1 2100
5.7
Passmark (Single Core)

Power Consumption

How much power does the processor require?

Atom 230
7.5
E1 2100
6.1
TDP

Features

How does CPUBoss rank the features of each product?

Atom 230
0.9
E1 2100
1.2
Features and specifications that differ between products

CPUBoss Score

Performance, Single-core Performance, Power Consumption and Features

Atom 230
5.6
E1 2100
5.5

Winner
Intel Atom 230 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Atom 230  based on its 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

Intel Atom 230

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Atom 230

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Atom 230

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom 230

Report a correction
Is hyperthreaded Yes vs No Somewhat common; Maximizes usage of each CPU core
Higher clock speed 1.6 GHz vs 1 GHz More than 60% higher clock speed
Has a NX bit Yes vs No Somewhat common; Prevents a common class of security exploits
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 1.89 GHz vs 1 GHz Around 90% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Lower typical power consumption 3.25W vs 7.31W 2.2x lower typical power consumption
Better performance per watt 17.57 pt/W vs 11.62 pt/W More than 50% better performance per watt
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.6 GHz vs 1 GHz More than 60% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Lower annual home energy cost 0.96 $/year vs 2.17 $/year 2.2x lower annual home energy cost
Front view of AMD E1 2100

Reasons to consider the
AMD E1 2100

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Newer manufacturing process 28 nms vs 45 nms A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
More l2 cache 1 MB vs 0.5 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Has virtualization support Yes vs No Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines
More cores 2 vs 1 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Higher Maximum Operating Temperature 90 °C vs 85.2 °C More than 5% higher Maximum Operating Temperature

Benchmarks Real world tests of Atom 230 vs E1 2100

GeekBench (32-bit)

Atom 230
496
E1 2100
881

GeekBench

Atom 230
1,064
E1 2100
881

Passmark (Single Core)

Atom 230
242
E1 2100
360

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Atom 230  vs
E1 2100 
Clock speed 1.6 GHz 1 GHz
Cores Single core Dual core
Is hyperthreaded Yes No

features

Has a NX bit Yes No
Has virtualization support No Yes
Instruction-set-extensions
MMX
SSE
SSE4.2
SSE3
SSE2
Supplemental SSE3
SSE4.1
SSE4
SSE4a
AES

gpu

GPU None GPU
Label N/A Radeon™ HD 8210
Latest DirectX N/A 11.0

details

Atom 230  vs
E1 2100 
Threads 2 2
L2 cache 0.5 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nms 28 nms
Max CPUs 1 1
Operating temperature Unknown - 85.2°C Unknown - 90°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 1.89 GHz 1 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.6 GHz 1 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 1.89 GHz 1 GHz

power consumption

TDP 4W 9W
Annual home energy cost 0.96 $/year 2.17 $/year
Performance per watt 17.57 pt/W 11.62 pt/W
Typical power consumption 3.25W 7.31W
Intel Atom 230
Report a correction
AMD E1 2100
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus