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 Intel Atom E665C

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom E665C

Report a correction
Much lower typical power consumption 5.69W vs 159.66W 28.1x lower typical power consumption
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Much lower annual home energy cost 1.69 $/year vs 56.1 $/year 33.3x lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 6.13 $/year vs 159.62 $/year 26x lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of AMD FX 8350

Reasons to consider the
AMD FX 8350

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 8 MB vs 0.5 MB 16x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much higher clock speed 4 GHz vs 1.3 GHz More than 3x higher clock speed
More advanced architecture x86-64 vs x86 A 64-bit architecture allows more RAM to be installed and accessed by the processor
Much newer manufacturing process 32 nm vs 45 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.69 GHz vs 1.3 GHz More than 3.5x better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Has a NX bit Yes vs No Somewhat common; Prevents a common class of security exploits
More cores 8 vs 1 7 more cores; run more applications at once
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 8.79 GHz vs 1.3 GHz More than 6.8x better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
More threads 8 vs 2 6 more threads
Newer Oct, 2012 vs Nov, 2010 Release date over 1 years later

Features Key features of the Atom E665C  vs FX 8350 

clock speed

Atom E665C
1.3 GHz
FX 8350
4 GHz

L2 cache

Atom E665C
0.5 MB
FX 8350
8 MB

overclocked clock speed (air)

Atom E665C
1.3 GHz
FX 8350
4.69 GHz

overclocked clock speed (water)

Atom E665C
1.3 GHz
FX 8350
8.79 GHz

TDP

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Atom E665C  vs
FX 8350 
Clock speed 1.3 GHz 4 GHz
Cores Single core Octa core

features

Has a NX bit No Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
AVX 1.1
SSE2
F16C
MMX
XOP
AVX
SSE3
SSE
ABM
BMI1
CLMUL
AMD64
SSE4.1
FMA4
FMA3
SSE4.2
CVT16
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
AES
TBM
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 7W 125W
Annual home energy cost 1.69 $/year 56.1 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 6.13 $/year 159.62 $/year
Typical power consumption 5.69W 159.66W

details

Atom E665C  vs
FX 8350 
Architecture x86 x86-64
Threads 2 8
L2 cache 0.5 MB 8 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 1.3 GHz 4.69 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.3 GHz 8.79 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 1.3 GHz 4.69 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Integrated N/A
GPU clock speed 400 MHz N/A

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1866
DDR2-800
DDR2
Channels Single Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC No Yes
Maximum bandwidth 6,400 MB/s 29,866.66 MB/s
Intel Atom E665C
Report a correction
AMD FX 8350
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus