CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 230 vs 2100

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

Passmark and GeekBench (32-bit)

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

Passmark (Single Core)

Power Consumption

How much power does the processor require?

TDP

Features

How does CPUBoss rank the features of each product?

Features and specifications that differ between products

CPUBoss Score

Performance, Single-core Performance, Power Consumption and Features

Winner
Intel Atom 230 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Atom 230  based on its .

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
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
Slightly better performance per watt 17.33 pt/W vs 11.52 pt/W More than 50% better performance per watt
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
Much newer manufacturing process 28 nm vs 45 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for maximum performance when needed, while conserving power and minimizing heat production when not needed
Has virtualization support Yes vs No Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines
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
More cores 2 vs 1 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Newer Apr, 2013 vs Jun, 2008 Release date over 4 years later
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

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 Yes
Has virtualization support No Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
F16C
MMX
AVX
SSE3
SSE
BMI1
AMD64
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling No Yes

power consumption

TDP 4W 9W
Annual home energy cost 0.96 $/year 2.17 $/year
Performance per watt 17.33 pt/W 11.52 pt/W
Typical power consumption 3.25W 7.31W

details

Atom 230  vs
E1 2100 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
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 nm 28 nm
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

integrated graphics

GPU None GPU
Label N/A Radeon™ HD 8210
Latest DirectX N/A 11.0
GPU clock speed N/A 300 MHz
Intel Atom 230
Report a correction
AMD E1 2100
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus