• Welcome to TechPowerUp Forums, Guest! Please check out our forum guidelines for info related to our community.
  • The forums have been upgraded with support for dark mode. By default it will follow the setting on your system/browser. You may override it by scrolling to the end of the page and clicking the gears icon.

Atom Dual-Core Performance Numbers Emerge

btarunr

btarunr

Editor & Senior Moderator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 9, 2007
Messages
47,849 (7.39/day)
Location
Dublin, Ireland
System Specs
System Name RBMK-1000
Processor AMD Ryzen 7 5700G
Motherboard Gigabyte B550 AORUS Elite V2
Cooling DeepCool Gammax L240 V2
Memory 2x 16GB DDR4-3200
Video Card(s) Galax RTX 4070 Ti EX
Storage Samsung 990 1TB
Display(s) BenQ 1440p 60 Hz 27-inch
Case Corsair Carbide 100R
Audio Device(s) ASUS SupremeFX S1220A
Power Supply Cooler Master MWE Gold 650W
Mouse ASUS ROG Strix Impact
Keyboard Gamdias Hermes E2
Software Windows 11 Pro
A spy-shot of the dual-core Intel Atom processor has surfaced. The picture reveals an important bit about the design of the processor. Dual-core Atom isn't about two processor cores integrated onto one die, but two dies sharing a package and front-side bus, much in the same way its distant ancestor, the Pentium D was built. This design allows modularity and helps Intel cut manufacturing costs. They don't have to build separate wafers of dual-core dice but rather use two single core dice and integrate them onto one package. The Atom 330 will be the first product based on this design. Early performance tests with arithmetic and memory bandwidth reveal a good level of scaling, close to 100% that of the N270, a single-core 1.6 GHz part:



Processor Arithmetic Test

Intel Atom N270 1.6GHz - 8291 kpixels/s
Intel Atom 330 1.6GHz Dual Core - 16920 kpixels/s
Intel Core 2 Duo U7700 1.3GHz - 24742 kpixels/s

Memory Bandwidth Test

Intel Atom N270 1.6GHz - 3.54 GB/s
Intel Atom 330 1.6GHz Dual Core - 7.18 GB/s
Intel Core 2 Duo U7700 1.3GHz - 9.53 GB/s

The tests show Core 2 Duo U7700 to outperform these, though it is to be noted that Atom 330 isn't based on the Core architecture and that the Atom is expected to be priced much lower, to cater to the ULPC industry. EeeUser forum has a set of numbers from tests that can be read here.

View at TechPowerUp Main Site
 
Last edited by a moderator:
dont be so harsh newtekie1 although its an intel(evil empire) processor it might be a usefull product IMO.OLPCs could help most of the poor people of the world:)
 
$ReaPeR$ said:
dont be so harsh newtekie1 although its an intel(evil empire) processor it might be a usefull product IMO.OLPCs could help most of the poor people of the world:)
Click to expand...

I wasn't being harsh, there is nothing wrong with the method, I was just adding information to the original post.

I own a Eee PC with an Atom in it, I love the little thing.
 
OMG!!
A CPU that scales its 100% as it should do :eek::eek::eek:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
That is pretty impressive scaling. Good job intel.

However I'd like to know how much more power is used by that dual core. It may not be worth it if it is doubled as well : (
 
i wonder if you can buy one and swap it for the original atom?
 
Darkrealms said:
That is pretty impressive scaling. Good job intel.

However I'd like to know how much more power is used by that dual core. It may not be worth it if it is doubled as well : (
Click to expand...

Yes, the power used will most likely be close to double.

cdawall said:
i wonder if you can buy one and swap it for the original atom?
Click to expand...

Atom chips aren't socketed, so no. Though after seeing these numbers, I kind of wish I had waited on buying my Eee PC, but oh well. If I did that I would always be waiting.
 
Last edited:
newtekie1 said:
Yes, the power used will most likely be close to double.



Atom chips aren't socketed, so no. Though after seeing these numbers, I kind of wish I had waited on buying my Eee PC, but oh well. If I did that I would always be waiting.
Click to expand...

thanks ugh i guess i just have to wait
 
about time i think they couldve did dual core sooner, those type of pcs will benefit from dual core
 
it got hyperthreading so 2 threads
 
The single core version has Hyperthreading, but I'm not sure about the dual-core version. It might be like the old Pentium 4 and Pentium D situation. Where the single core processors had HT and the dual cores didn't.
 
Morgoth said:
it got hyperthreading so 2 threads
Click to expand...

actually on a dual core that would make 4 threads ;)


newtekie1 said:
The single core version has Hyperthreading, but I'm not sure about the dual-core version. It might be like the old Pentium 4 and Pentium D situation. Where the single core processors had HT and the dual cores didn't.
Click to expand...

actually intel's roadmap lists them as having HT also
 
ht is the future ;)
 
ht is the past
 
realy? why is nehalem and atom fully supporting ht ?
 
Because Intel wants to use an old out-dated technology to hype marketting. HT on a single core processor is nice to have, but once you have a dual-core or higher, HT is pretty useless.
 
no its not useless
the HT of today is tottaly more advanced then p4 got
 
Glad I waited and haven't picked up a netbook yet. Hopefully these will be available by the holdiay season when i will probably be in the market for one.
 
Morgoth said:
no its not useless
the HT of today is tottaly more advanced then p4 got
Click to expand...

HT on a dual core processor is useless. And no, it isn't really any different than what was implemented in the P4 days. The Replay System performance hit has been fixed, but other than that it is the same old SMT.

Again, in a single core processor, it is nice to have. But once you have a dual core, or more, the usefullness really goes away. As the chances of it actually being used is reduced to almost nothing. Any work that would be helped out by HT, the second core would take care of instead.
 
more threads is allways bether
 
Morgoth said:
more threads is allways bether
Click to expand...

your thick headed aren't you?

here is a typical one of your posts

"HT is god i have a P4 oh and AMD sucks"

get over it your views are not backed by ANYTHING
 
what i am not saying ht is god ur saying that ht is rubish
yes i have a p4 that wil change soon and you probaly dont have the funds to buy what i am getting
and yes amd sucks at high end, extreme cpu's
and as i said before HT is the future on intels road map dont like it? go amd!
..zucht...
 
Last edited:
Morgoth said:
more threads is allways bether
Click to expand...

:laugh:More threads are useless right now. The common user, or even the high end power user, barely makes use of 2 threads. Having more is, in fact, useless. A nettop/netbook users is never going to make use of more than the 2 threads provided by the cores themselves on tha Atom Dual-Core, and enthusiust users aren't going to really use anything more than the two threads provided by the two cores used in a Core 2 Duo.

The extra threads provided by HT are useless in the current situation of computing except in computers with a single core. More threades, that go unused, are useless.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top