Featured Articles

IHS teardown reveals Galaxy S5 BOM

IHS teardown reveals Galaxy S5 BOM

Research firm IHS got hold of Samsung’s new flagship smartphone and took it apart to the last bolt to figure out…

More...
Galaxy S5, HTC One M8 available selling well

Galaxy S5, HTC One M8 available selling well

Samsung’s Galaxy S5 has finally gone on sale and it can be yours for €699, which is quite a lot of…

More...
Intel lists Haswell refresh parts

Intel lists Haswell refresh parts

Intel has added a load of Haswell refresh parts to its official price list and there really aren’t any surprises to…

More...
Respawn confirms Titanfall DLC for May

Respawn confirms Titanfall DLC for May

During his appearance at PAX East panel and confirmed on Twitter, Titanfall developer Respawn confirmed that the first DLC pack for…

More...
KFA2 GTX 780 Ti Hall Of Fame reviewed

KFA2 GTX 780 Ti Hall Of Fame reviewed

KFA2 gained a lot of overclocking experience with the GTX 780 Hall of Fame (HOF), which we had a chance to…

More...
Frontpage Slideshow | Copyright © 2006-2010 orks, a business unit of Nuevvo Webware Ltd.
Wednesday, 25 May 2011 11:02

AMD E-350 vs Intel Atom D525+ION2 - Conclusion

Written by Eliot Kucharik

E-350_vs_D525_ASRock_front_small top-value-2008-lr

Review:
Intel Atom is still dead

 

Conclusion

Intel Atom D525 + ION2 vs AMD E-350:

Overall both boards did well. While the performance is similar in multi-threaded application (except WinRAR where AMD is miles ahead) the AMD E-350 shines in the single-threaded department. Especially browers and even Windows feel faster and more responsive. The UVD3 engine is good enough to play all standard formats and blu-rays without a problem. Just 1080p with 60fps is out of the question because the GPU does not clock high enough. If there are codecs which get no hardware acceleration and have 1080p resolution both CPUs are too weak to perform seamless playback. The ION2 is faster (due to the higher clock) at hardware accelerated playback reducing the CPU load more compared to the E-350 but 16 cores is just too few to impress in games. The real difference between the two is now the price. The AMD E-350 boards got cheaper, while the Atom/ION2 combo still costs a lot and this particular board sells for about €130, which is a bit too expensive for our taste.

 

Zotac ITXION-S:

The board is superbly built and the passive fan wasn't as hot as we expected. The biggest downfall of this board is it's price currently at €144,-/$190,-. We would take any E-350 board over any Atom board. Zotac does offer a passive E-350 board as well, the Zotac Fusion ITX but with about €123,-/$169,- it's considerable more expensive compared to ASRock and uses SO-DIMMs, but it offers excellent build quality and WLAN.

 

ASRock E350M1/USB3:

The ASRock E350M1/USB3 is cleary designed as a desktop replacement. While the inclusion of the USB 3.0 and all solid capacitors is an welcomes edition, the board is still using a 4cm active fan which gets audible under load. It's not insanely loud as we feared, but using the computer on your desktop it may get on your nerves. If you use it as an HTPC, so your case stays near the TV or monitor, you won't notice it. It's essential to run the fan mostly at highest speed, because under load the E-350 may experience temperature problems when your case is really small and the APU will clock down. ASRock is working on a BIOS which will adjust the fan-speed according to the CPU temperature, so we recommand to take a look in their beta-zone. At a price for about €93,-/$115,- the board is not a bargain, but it is still affordable as a HTPC or surfstation. If you uses it as we described, the downside to the active fan can be overlooked.

Top_Value_2011

(Page 6 of 6)
Last modified on Saturday, 28 May 2011 00:13
blog comments powered by Disqus

Comments  

 
+16 #1 bunker 2011-05-25 11:52
excuse me?

while i do like the benchmarks i don't like your conclusions AT ALL.
good thing you've added your results...

the E350 completely crushes both atoms in every benchmark other than dual threaded cinebench...

And i LOL'd at your conclusions the old atom uses 4Watts less in far cry. Sure, thats what the graph says, but the E350 accually doubles the 330's framrates. how can you honestly take that benchmark as a standard.

sigh...

maybe you should also add an efficiency score for far cry. that should be fun to watch you justify intel/nvidiass poor results there
 
 
+5 #2 Wolfesteinabhi 2011-05-25 12:03
AND YEAH this site clearly needs a PROOF READER! .. i read the sentence on first page thrice to understand that it actually is saying "512KB of Cache"

"The Atom D525 is clocked at 1.8GHz, has 2x 512MB 2nd Level Cache" LOL :D
 
 
+7 #3 The blue fox 2011-05-25 12:11
I don't understand Gaming bench marks on hardware like this. No one ever going to play games Other then Warcraft on this kind of hardware.
 
 
+8 #4 nele 2011-05-25 12:38
Quoting The blue fox:
I don't understand Gaming bench marks on hardware like this. No one ever going to play games Other then Warcraft on this kind of hardware.


Well it depends really... I'm getting a Fusion HTPC soon and since I'm not into console gaming (or any sort of gaming for that matter), I'm planning to install a few "oldies".

Of course, hardware won't be an issue for Worms or Angry Birds, but there's plenty of older games worth playing, for example some racing titles, fighting games, sports (mainly PES) - basically anything that can be fun with a couple of gamepads and a bunch of drunk people around...

I don't need a console, I just want to run some old, simple and silly games when I feel like it. :-)
 
 
+1 #5 eliot 2011-05-28 00:13
Quoting The blue fox:
I don't understand Gaming bench marks on hardware like this. No one ever going to play games Other then Warcraft on this kind of hardware.


LoL, in the last review I did not bother to include any games and many were outraged... So what is it what you want? If I do one game it's not ok, if I don't it's not ok either... make up your minds. ;-)
 
 
0 #6 eliot 2011-05-28 00:18
Quoting bunker:
excuse me?

while i do like the benchmarks i don't like your conclusions AT ALL.
good thing you've added your results...

the E350 completely crushes both atoms in every benchmark other than dual threaded cinebench...

And i LOL'd at your conclusions the old atom uses 4Watts less in far cry. Sure, thats what the graph says, but the E350 accually doubles the 330's framrates. how can you honestly take that benchmark as a standard.

sigh...

maybe you should also add an efficiency score for far cry. that should be fun to watch you justify intel/nvidiass poor results there


two week CPUs or CPU vs APU does not crash each other... While in WinRAR the difference is noticable (as a user) in any other application you won't notice. So there is no crushing involved. Crushing maybe a word to choose for the single-threaded performance which is still more important nowadays because most software besides games don't bother to utilize that potential. And something like Photoshop is a bit too much for such CPUs either. Even the x264 was just for the fun of it, not really to suggest to any user to do any encoding with it ;-)
 

To be able to post comments please log-in with Disqus

 

Facebook activity

Latest Commented Articles

Recent Comments