Athlon II X4 630 & 620: Affordable Quad Cores

CPUs|Motherboards
Viewing page 4 of 5 pages. Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next

Average/Total Benchmark Power Consumption

Average Benchmark Power Consumption
Processor
NOD32
WinRAR
iTunes
TMPGEnc
C2Q Q8200S
75W
84W
78W
96W
X4 620 UV*
85W
82W
88W
104W
C2Q Q6600
86W
99W
92W
116W
X4 630 UV*
93W
90W
97W
116W
X4 620
93W
89W
99W
124W
X4 630
99W
95W
106W
131W
X2 550 BE
106W
105W
108W
118W
X4 810
109W
104W
112W
137W
X3 720 BE
112W
111W
118W
130W
*X4 630 undervolted by 0.125V, X4 620 by 0.2375V.
Total Benchmark Power Consumption (watt-hours)
Test State
NOD32
WinRAR
iTunes
TMPGEnc
Total
C2Q Q8200S
3.73
5.20
5.63
6.29
20.85
X4 620 UV*
4.79
5.58
8.41
6.12
24.91
C2Q Q6600
4.20
6.08
7.03
7.70
25.01
X4 630 UV*
4.91
5.95
8.65
6.41
25.92
X4 620
5.24
6.06
9.46
7.30
28.06
X4 630
5.23
6.28
9.45
7.24
28.20
X2 550 BE
4.53
5.51
8.52
9.64
28.20
X4 810
5.60
6.12
10.52
7.95
30.19
X3 720 BE
5.20
6.04
10.26
11.12
32.62
*X4 630 undervolted by 0.125V, X4 620 by 0.2375V.

When we calculated the total number of watt-hours used during our tests, we found that the new Athlon II's beat their Phenom II cousins — the X4 810 by 7% and the X3 720 by 14%. The dual core X2 550 matched their energy efficiency due its superior performance in the simpler applications in our test suite, thanks to its L3 cache and higher clock speed. The Q6600 used about 11% less while the 65W Q8200S dominated both Athlons by 26%. Undervolting brought the two processors basically on par with the Q6600.



Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next

CPUs|Motherboards - Article Index
Help support this site, buy from one of our affiliate retailers!
Search: