Results: SiSoft Sandra and 3D Mark VantageSiSoft Sandra 2009 SP4
Comparing a dual core product to a quad core is not exactly fair, but things somewhat even out when we start talking about money. Considering that the E8500 is $70 more expensive than the X4 630, all is fair in benchmarks and war. SiSoft takes a look at the more theoretical side of processor performance, and is able to address multi-threading without a problem.
Nothing exactly startling here. The 630 is faster than the 620, the memory performance of the Athlon II parts far exceeds that of the Core 2, and the quad core parts walk away from the faster clocked dual core E8500.
3D Mark Vantage
Running on integrated graphics will of course limit gameplay, as Intel is not really well known for their speed and compatibility in many modern games. Considering that 3D Mark Vantage is a major benchmark in the industry, I am curious to see what optimizations Intel has put into their drivers to make their products seem more competitive.
Well, it certainly seems that Intel has optimized their software quite well to perform as it did in 3D Mark Vantage. Unfortunately, after playing around in a couple of titles like Call of Duty: World at War and Fallout 3, the G41 performs and looks awful as compared to the 785G. What we should take away from this benchmark is that the quad core AMD parts are outperforming the dual core E8500 in heavily threaded applications.