0 Comments
| Intel Atom N270 vs AMD G G-T48N |
Released June, 2008
Intel Atom N270
- 1.6 GHz
- Single core
Reasons to buy the Intel Atom N270
![]() | Higher clock speed 1.6 GHz | ![]() | Lower typical power consumption 2.03W |
![]() | Lower annual home energy cost 0.6 $/year | ![]() | Lower annual commercial energy cost 2.19 $/year |
VS
Released January, 2011
AMD G G-T48N
- 1.4 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the AMD G G-T48N
![]() | Has a built-in GPU Yes | ![]() | More l2 cache 1 MB |
![]() | Has virtualization support Yes | ![]() | Newer manufacturing process 40 nm |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
Higher clock speed | 1.6 GHz | vs | 1.4 GHz | Around 15% higher clock speed | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Lower typical power consumption | 2.03W | vs | 14.63W | 7.2x lower typical power consumption | |||
Lower annual home energy cost | 0.6 $/year | vs | 4.34 $/year | 7.2x lower annual home energy cost | |||
Lower annual commercial energy cost | 2.19 $/year | vs | 15.77 $/year | 7.2x lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| |||||||
Has a built-in GPU | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required | |||
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 | |||
Newer manufacturing process | 40 nm | vs | 45 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
Newer | Jan, 2011 | vs | Jun, 2008 | Release date over 2 years later | |||
More cores | 2 | vs | 1 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once |
Features Key features of the Atom N270 vs G G-T48N
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Atom N270 | vs | G G-T48N |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 1.4 GHz | |
Cores | Single core | Dual core | |
features | |||
Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
Has virtualization support | No | Yes | |
Instruction set extensions | |||
SSE4a | |||
SSE2 | |||
MMX | |||
SSE4 | |||
SSE3 | |||
SSE | |||
AMD64 | |||
AMD-V | |||
Supplemental SSE3 | |||
Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes |
details | Atom N270 | vs | G G-T48N |
---|---|---|---|
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 | 40 nm | |
Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
Clock multiplier | 12 | 7 | |
integrated graphics | |||
GPU | None | GPU | |
Label | N/A | AMD Radeon HD 6310 | |
GPU clock speed | N/A | 500 MHz | |
power consumption | |||
TDP | 2.5W | 18W | |
Annual home energy cost | 0.6 $/year | 4.34 $/year | |
Annual commercial energy cost | 2.19 $/year | 15.77 $/year | |
Typical power consumption | 2.03W | 14.63W |
Intel Atom N270 ![]() | AMD G G-T48N ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$64 | $32 | |
N450 vs N270 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$64 | $32 | |
N455 vs N270 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$42 | $32 | |
N2600 vs N270 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$69 | $32 | |
630 vs N270 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$17 | $32 | |
Z3735F vs N270 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$32 | ||
G-T44R vs N270 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$63 | $32 | |
D525 vs N270 | ||
Popular Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$300 | $305 | |
2500 vs W3520 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$350 | $272 | |
6700K vs 4790K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
6410 vs 4200U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
7th Gen A9-9410 vs 6200U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$161 | $275 | |
N3540 vs 4005U | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$225 | $134 | |
3217U vs 847 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$180 | ||
5200 vs 3470 | ||