CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of C2358 vs 6000+ 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

4.9

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Atom C2358 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Atom C2358  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 C2358

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Atom C2358

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Atom C2358

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom C2358

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 90 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much lower typical power consumption 5.69W vs 101.56W 17.9x lower typical power consumption
Much better performance per watt 6.4 pt/W vs 0.53 pt/W More than 12x better performance per watt
Newer Jul, 2013 vs Feb, 2007 Release date over 6 years later
Much lower annual home energy cost 1.69 $/year vs 30.11 $/year 17.9x lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 6.13 $/year vs 109.5 $/year 17.9x lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of AMD Athlon X2 6000+

Reasons to consider the
AMD Athlon X2 6000+

Report a correction
Much higher clock speed 3 GHz vs 1.7 GHz More than 75% higher clock speed
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
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.33 GHz vs 1.7 GHz More than 95% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Better PassMark (Single core) score 898 vs 448 More than 2x better PassMark (Single core) score
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.53 GHz vs 1.7 GHz More than 2x better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Atom C2358 vs Athlon X2 6000+

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Atom C2358  vs
Athlon X2 6000+ 
Clock speed 1.7 GHz 3 GHz
Cores Dual core Dual core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE3
SSE
3DNow!
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling No Yes

power consumption

TDP 7W 125W
Annual home energy cost 1.69 $/year 30.11 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 6.13 $/year 109.5 $/year
Performance per watt 6.4 pt/W 0.53 pt/W
Typical power consumption 5.69W 101.56W

details

Atom C2358  vs
Athlon X2 6000+ 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 2 2
Manufacture process 22 nm 90 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 1.7 GHz 3.33 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.7 GHz 3.53 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 1.7 GHz 3.33 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None None
Label N/A N/A
Latest DirectX N/A N/A
Number of displays supported N/A N/A
GPU clock speed N/A N/A
Turbo clock speed N/A N/A
3DMark06 N/A N/A
Intel Atom C2358
Report a correction
AMD Athlon X2 6000+
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus