Intel's Atom Processor Compared to 68 CPUs in Bench
by Anand Lal Shimpi on May 20, 2009 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- Anand
A few months ago I launched something we quickly titled "Bench". The idea behind AnandTech Bench is that it's a publicly accessible version of the database of benchmarks we've run internally. You can currently compare 34 AMD CPUs and 36 Intel CPUs in the engine across 18 benchmarks. I'm working on adding power data as well.
You can access Bench at its own URL: http://www.anandtech.com/bench
Currently Bench only has CPU data in it but there are plans to expand it to storage and GPUs in the future, the former being far easier than the latter due to constantly changing drivers. The data used in bench is the same data used in our reviews, but it has to be entered in manually after a new CPU launches. If you ever see a chip get reviewed on AT but don't see its data in Bench, drop me a line and I'll make sure it gets in there.
Today I added in data for the Atom 230 and 330 processors using Intel's D945GCLF and D945GCLF2 motherboards so you can see exactly how both single and dual-core Atom stack up to modern day desktop microprocessors.
I'm also considering running data on an older CPU. In my recent Zotac Ion review I included performance results from a single-core Northwood Pentium 4 2.66GHz processor, which inspired me to want to run a whole slew of older P4 numbers for inclusion in bench.
I don't think it's wise to spend several weeks rerunning every single old CPU out there, but I figured one or two couldn't hurt.
Any suggestions from the crowd? Is a single-core Pentium 4 good enough or would you like to see some dual-core P4 stuff? What about anything from the Athlon 64 days? Respond in the comments and come to some sort of reasonable agreement and I'll see about getting the data in there :)
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
92 Comments
View All Comments
dgtljunglist - Wednesday, May 20, 2009 - link
I'd love to see some more Athlon 64 X2 and Core 1 Duo data, since I'm still running those after 3 or 4 years, and I think it's reasonable to expect that others are as well.This is a great tool though! It would be a great novelty to see every processor you could get your hands on, but that's of course not practical.
strikeback03 - Thursday, May 21, 2009 - link
Core Duo was only in laptops, so would require different chipsets and motherboards and is probably not in too many desktops. A few of the older AthlonXP/A64/A64 X2 would be useful for comparison though.Maybe a summer intern to go through all the old tests/articles and enter numbers into the bench.
BernardP - Wednesday, May 20, 2009 - link
Thanks for providing this very useful comparison tool. I hope it becomes permanent and is very regularly updated.MrSpadge - Wednesday, May 20, 2009 - link
I'd like to have some veterans included, which are still used as light-duty working / surfing stations. I'd think along the lines of Athlon XP 2400+ or P3 1.0 GHz. And if you still have a P2 or P1 that would be fun ;)(no, I'm not just too lazy to write Phenom)
MrS
LuxZg - Wednesday, May 20, 2009 - link
Well, I'd like to second an Athlon 2400+ to 2600+ for a feeling of speed. My old desktop which I used untill about a year and a half ago was around that speed, and some of the computers in my company are Athlons 2200-2500+ as well, so that would be a really nice comparision. If Atom can run as well as one of those, or even bet them - I'll be sold!fishbits - Wednesday, May 20, 2009 - link
Thank goodness, at least on the GPU side. Been a rash of comparisons like this one http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3553...">http://www.anandtech.com/video/showdoc.aspx?i=3553... lately. While I'm sure the numbers are valid, not everyone is upgrading his video card every three months and is up on every last refresh. Maybe they bought their card 2-3 years/generations ago, and want to know just how much improvement they'll get going to a newer one.So yeah, being able to see older scores in the same graph with newer ones is a huge benefit for some of us. Likewise, how often do the games used to benchmark GPUs really need to change? Keep a couple of old popular games for consistency, WoW, whatever, so I know the relative increase in power between the old card and newer ones. There are some sites *cough* that do have performance charts that have a meaningful history length, and it's very appreciated.
Keep at least a couple of representative cards from each generation shown, with more complete listings from the current gen. And if benchmark games aren't picked in a faddish fashion (Age of Conan? GRID? Really?) then it could be set up where exact old cards are selected from a drop-down box to minimize visual clutter in the presentation.
Jackattak - Wednesday, May 20, 2009 - link
Couldn't agree more.I upgrade my GPU every 1.5-2 years and would love to see how it stacks up to the newer ones and how much potential performance improvement I'll be getting.
Same goes for CPU's, although my tastes have been quenched (currently have a Core 2 Duo 6850 3GHz and was happy to see the bast improvement that a new 8600 3.33GHz would bring to the table).
I wouldn't mind seeing an HT 3.2 GHz P4 in there just for giggles if you have one laying around, just to see how it would stack up to the latest and greatest Core 2's with their insane cache levels nowadays.
Can't wait for the GPU's to hit!
Thanks for setting this up, Anand. Greatly appreciated!
Dudler - Wednesday, May 20, 2009 - link
All hail the new list :)Plz do the same with GPU's, THG's list is utter faeces. (Look it up)
Greetings from the land og the midnight sun, Norway :-D
Lifted - Wednesday, May 20, 2009 - link
I'd be more interested in seeing the highest clock single core P4 (3.8 or 4GHz?). That and a dual core P4 should be enough to get a good understanding of the performance at the time. I don't actually know anyone who bought a dual core P4, but if you have one laying around you might as well.Syran - Wednesday, May 20, 2009 - link
I'd like to see an Opteron 165 or something along those lines. And maybe a low end hyperthreaded P4.