CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 515 vs 1200 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

6.7

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
AMD E1 1200 

CPUBoss recommends the AMD E1 1200  based on its performance and 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

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Pentium 4 515

Reasons to consider the
Intel Pentium 4 515

Report a correction
Much higher clock speed 2.93 GHz vs 1.4 GHz More than 2x higher clock speed
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.92 GHz vs 1.41 GHz More than 2.8x better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.93 GHz vs 1.4 GHz More than 2x better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of AMD E1 1200

Reasons to consider the
AMD E1 1200

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 32 nm vs 90 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
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 lower typical power consumption 14.63W vs 68.25W 4.7x lower typical power consumption
Has virtualization support Yes vs No Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines
Much higher Maximum operating temperature 100 °C vs 67.7 °C Around 50% higher Maximum operating temperature
Newer Jun, 2012 vs Jul, 2005 Release date over 7 years later
Much lower annual home energy cost 4.34 $/year vs 20.24 $/year 4.7x lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 15.77 $/year vs 73.58 $/year 4.7x lower annual commercial energy cost
More cores 2 vs 1 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Better performance per watt 2.33 pt/W vs 0.99 pt/W More than 2.2x better performance per watt

Benchmarks Real world tests of Pentium 4 515 vs E1 1200

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench

E1 1200
1,310

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Pentium 4 515  vs
E1 1200 
Clock speed 2.93 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
SSE3
SSE
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling No Yes

power consumption

TDP 84W 18W
Annual home energy cost 20.24 $/year 4.34 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 73.58 $/year 15.77 $/year
Performance per watt 0.99 pt/W 2.33 pt/W
Typical power consumption 68.25W 14.63W

details

Pentium 4 515  vs
E1 1200 
Threads 1 2
L2 cache 1 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 90 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Voltage range 1.25 - 1.4V 0.88 - 1.35V
Operating temperature Unknown - 67.7°C Unknown - 100°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.92 GHz 1.41 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.93 GHz 1.4 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.92 GHz 1.41 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None GPU
Label N/A Radeon™ HD 7310
Latest DirectX N/A 11.0
Intel Pentium 4 515
Report a correction
AMD E1 1200
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus