Winner
AMD R R-464L
CPUBoss recommends the AMD R R-464L based on its performance and power consumption.
See full details Intel Pentium E5700 vs AMD R R-464L |
Released July, 2010
Intel Pentium E5700
- 3 GHz
- Dual core
5.1 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Intel Pentium E5700
 | Higher clock speed 3 GHz | | Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.87 GHz |
| | Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.2 GHz |
VS
Released May, 2012
AMD R R-464L
- 2.3 GHz
- Quad core
7.8 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the AMD R R-464L
| | Much more l2 cache 4 MB | | Has a built-in GPU Yes |
| | Much newer manufacturing process 32 nm | | Significantly lower typical power consumption 28.44W |
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E5700 vs R-464L 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 | |
| 7.8 | CPUBoss Score |
Combination of all six facets | |
 | Winner |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
| |  | AMD R R-464LCPUBoss Winner |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Higher clock speed | 3 GHz | vs | 2.3 GHz | More than 30% higher clock speed | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.87 GHz | vs | 2.3 GHz | Around 70% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.2 GHz | vs | 2.3 GHz | Around 85% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
| |||||||
| Much more l2 cache | 4 MB | vs | 2 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 | |||
| Much newer manufacturing process | 32 nm | vs | 45 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Significantly lower typical power consumption | 28.44W | vs | 52.81W | More than 45% lower typical power consumption | |||
| Much higher Maximum operating temperature | 100 °C | vs | 74.1 °C | Around 35% higher Maximum operating temperature | |||
| Better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score | 4,210 | vs | 2,840 | Around 50% better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score | |||
| More cores | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
| Better performance per watt | 3.96 pt/W | vs | 1.9 pt/W | More than 2x better performance per watt | |||
| More threads | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many threads | |||
| Newer | May, 2012 | vs | Jul, 2010 | Release date over 1 years later | |||
| Significantly lower annual home energy cost | 8.43 $/year | vs | 15.66 $/year | More than 45% lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost | 30.66 $/year | vs | 56.94 $/year | More than 45% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Pentium E5700 vs R R-464L
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Pentium E5700 | vs | R R-464L |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 3 GHz | 2.3 GHz | |
| Cores | Dual core | Quad core | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE4a | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| F16C | |||
| MMX | |||
| XOP | |||
| AVX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE | |||
| BMI1 | |||
| AMD64 | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| FMA4 | |||
| FMA3 | |||
| SSE4.2 | |||
| AMD-V | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| AES | |||
| TBM | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 65W | 35W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 15.66 $/year | 8.43 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 56.94 $/year | 30.66 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 1.9 pt/W | 3.96 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 52.81W | 28.44W | |
details | Pentium E5700 | vs | R R-464L |
|---|---|---|---|
| Threads | 2 | 4 | |
| L2 cache | 2 MB | 4 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 1 MB/core | 1 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 45 nm | 32 nm | |
| Transistor count | 228,000,000 | 1,303,000,000 | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock multiplier | 15 | 11 | |
| Voltage range | 0.85 - 1.36V | 0.81 - 1.3V | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 74.1°C | Unknown - 100°C | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 3.87 GHz | 2.3 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.2 GHz | 2.3 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 3.87 GHz | 2.3 GHz | |
integrated graphics | |||
| GPU | None | GPU | |
| Label | N/A | AMD Radeon HD 7660G | |
| GPU clock speed | N/A | 497 MHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | N/A | 686 MHz | |
 Intel Pentium E5700  Report a correction |  AMD R R-464L Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $64 | $179 | |
| E5700 vs E8400 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $64 | $125 | |
| E5700 vs E7500 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $64 | ||
| E5700 vs Q6600 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $64 | $125 | |
| E5700 vs 3220 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $64 | ||
| E5700 vs 250 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $64 | $125 | |
| E5700 vs E7400 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $64 | $72 | |
| E5700 vs E5300 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $305 | $300 | |
| W3520 vs 2500 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $272 | $350 | |
| 4790K vs 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 4200U vs 6410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| 3470 vs 5200 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $125 | $50 | |
| 3220 vs 5300 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $134 | $225 | |
| 847 vs 3217U | ||
