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 N4200

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel N4200

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel N4200

Reasons to consider the
Intel N4200

Report a correction
Much higher turbo clock speed 2.5 GHz vs 0 GHz Compared to all cpus, 2.5 GHz turbo clock speed is just OK
Much newer manufacturing process 14 nm vs 65 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Significantly more l2 cache 2 MB vs 1 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Has virtualization support Yes vs No Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines
Much better performance per watt 13.15 pt/W vs 1.93 pt/W More than 6.8x better performance per watt
Significantly better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score 4,416 vs 1,491 Around 3x better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score
Newer Jul, 2016 vs May, 2007 Release date over 9 years later
Significantly lower typical power consumption 4.88W vs 25.19W 5.2x lower typical power consumption
Better geekbench 3 single core score 1,395 vs 808 Around 75% better geekbench 3 single core score
More cores 4 vs 2 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
More threads 4 vs 2 Twice as many threads
Slightly better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.39 GHz vs 2.2 GHz Around 10% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 1.45 $/year vs 7.47 $/year 5.2x lower annual home energy cost
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 5.26 $/year vs 27.16 $/year 5.2x lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of AMD Turion 64 X2 60

Reasons to consider the
AMD Turion 64 X2 60

Report a correction
Much better 3DMark06 CPU score 1,457 vs 28.3 Around 51.5x better 3DMark06 CPU score
Significantly higher clock speed 2 GHz vs 1.1 GHz More than 80% higher clock speed
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2 GHz vs 1.1 GHz More than 80% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of N4200 vs Turion 64 X2 60

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

N4200
4,416

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

N4200
1,120 MB/s
Turion 64 X2 60
53,400 MB/s

3D Mark 06 (CPU)

N4200
28.3

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

N4200  vs
Turion 64 X2 60 
Clock speed 1.1 GHz 2 GHz
Turbo clock speed 2.5 GHz 0 GHz
Cores Quad core Dual core

features

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

power consumption

TDP 6W 31W
Annual home energy cost 1.45 $/year 7.47 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 5.26 $/year 27.16 $/year
Performance per watt 13.15 pt/W 1.93 pt/W
Typical power consumption 4.88W 25.19W

details

N4200  vs
Turion 64 X2 60 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 2
L2 cache 2 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 14 nm 65 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.39 GHz 2.2 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.1 GHz 2 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.39 GHz 2.2 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU GPU None
Label Intel® HD Graphics 505 N/A
Number of displays supported 3 N/A
GPU clock speed 200 MHz N/A

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3
DDR2-667
Intel N4200
Report a correction
AMD Turion 64 X2 60
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus