Efficiency: Performance Per Watt Shootout
SYSmark 2004 SE Efficiency
Here is the deal: the numbers you see reflect the actual power in watt-hours used to complete the SYSmark 2004 SE run. The Core 2 Duo clearly required the least power, followed by the Atom 230. The Atom 330 dual core finished last, utilizing the most power for this workload.
We then divided the SYSmark 2004 SE score by the number of watt-hours used. The result seems disappointing for the Atom 330, and attests the great efficiency of the Core 2 system—again.
PCMark05 Efficiency
We did the same efficiency testing by tracking power and benchmark results using PCMark05. In this case, the differences are less significant, but the Core 2 Duo E7200 system was still the solution that required the least power to complete this benchmark.
In this benchmark the Atom 330 dual-core looks much better, as it provides clearly more performance in PCMark05, which helped to complete the benchmark run earlier and conserve some power this way. The Atom 330 is chasing the Core 2 machine, but it still doesn’t stand a chance.
AMD crafts custom EPYC CPU with HBM3 memory for Microsoft Azure – CPU with 88 Zen 4 cores and 450GB of HBM3 may be repurposed MI300C, four chips hit 7 TB/s
AMD-powered El Capitan is now the world's fastest supercomputer with 1.7 exaflops of performance — fastest Intel machine falls to third place on Top500 list
