CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 3217U vs 1450

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

3DMark06 (CPU), 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 Core i3 3217U 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i3 3217U  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 Core i3 3217U

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Core i3 3217U

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i3 3217U

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i3 3217U

Report a correction
Significantly higher clock speed 1.8 GHz vs 1 GHz 80% higher clock speed
Is hyperthreaded Yes vs No Somewhat common; Maximizes usage of each CPU core
Newer manufacturing process 22 nms vs 28 nms A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Significantly higher Maximum Operating Temperature 105 °C vs 90 °C More than 15% higher Maximum Operating Temperature
Better PassMark (Single core) score 879 vs 508 Around 75% better PassMark (Single core) score
Better 3DMark06 CPU score 2,229 vs 1,439 Around 55% better 3DMark06 CPU score
Better PassMark score 2,297 vs 1,562 More than 45% better PassMark score
Slightly better geekbench (32-bit) score 2,919 vs 1,952 Around 50% better geekbench (32-bit) score
Front view of AMD A6 1450

Reasons to consider the
AMD A6 1450

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 2 MB vs 0.5 MB 4x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Significantly more l2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Lower typical power consumption 6.5W vs 13.81W 2.1x lower typical power consumption
Better performance per watt 26.4 pt/W vs 20.32 pt/W Around 30% better performance per watt
Lower annual home energy cost 1.93 $/year vs 4.1 $/year 2.1x lower annual home energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i3 3217U vs A6 1450

GeekBench (32-bit)

A6 1450
1,952

GeekBench

A6 1450
1,952

3D Mark 06 (CPU)

A6 1450
1,439

Passmark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i3 3217U  vs
A6 1450 
Clock speed 1.8 GHz 1 GHz
Cores Dual core Quad core
Is unlocked No No
Is hyperthreaded Yes No

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has vitualization support Yes Yes
Instruction-set-extensions
MMX
SSE
SSE4.2
AVX
SSE3
SSE2
Supplemental SSE3
SSE4.1
SSE4
SSE4a
AES

power consumption

TDP 17W 8W
Annual home energy cost 4.1 $/year 1.93 $/year
Performance per watt 20.32 pt/W 26.4 pt/W
Typical power consumption 13.81W 6.5W

details

Core i3 3217U  vs
A6 1450 
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 0.5 MB 2 MB
L2 cache per core 0.25 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nms 28 nms
Max CPUs 1 1
Operating temperature Unknown - 105°C Unknown - 90°C

gpu

GPU GPU GPU
Label Intel® HD Graphics 4000 Radeon™ HD 8250
Latest DirectX 11.0 11.0
Intel Core i3 3217U
Report a correction
AMD A6 1450
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus