Viewing page 6 of 8 pages.
Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
PERFORMANCE
Many users bemoan the performance of Atom, so hopefully the E-350 will provide a significant boost in this area.
The E-350 trailed the SU2300 in our Photoshop test by just 11%. In our WinRAR compression test it managed to best both the Atom 330 and 510, but was slaughtered by the Celeron.
Similarly, the E-350 was 35% and 10% slower than the SU2300 in our iTunes AAC encoding and NOD32 anti-virus scan test respectively. While it couldn't top the CULV chip in these two tests, the E-350 had a better showing compared to the dual core Atoms.
We were very surprised to see the E-350 get whooped by both Atom CPUs and taking almost twice the time required by the SU2300 to encode a VC-1 clip with TMPGEnc. The difference in speed was less when using HandBrake to produce a H.264 MP4 but it was still substantial.
PCMark05 was much more favorable to the E35M1-M Pro, giving it about 300 points less than the SU2300/ION combination. 3DMark scores seem to indicate the Radeon 6310 is more or less on par with ION.
The results of standalone benchmarks for the games H.A.W.X. 2 and Lost Planet 2 were split between the Fusion platform a LGA1156 board with a Core i5-661 with Intel GMA HD graphics. Given the possibility of CPU bottlenecking, it may be that the Radeon 6310 is superior.
Note that the benchmarks were run at a 1280x800 on the E35M1-M Pro because 1366/1360x768 was not a visible option with the current AMD driver release. The results should be comparable as the difference in pixel count is only about 2%.
| Help support this site, buy from one of our affiliate retailers! |
|
