With systems like these it is very important to take power consumption into the equation, but there are some caveats this time around. First, these are in no way identical systems and a precise apples-to-apples test is nearly impossible to create based on the combinations and platforms available on the market. Secondly, the AMD APU test platform was just that: a test platform that wasn’t finalized hardware. If anything, we expect these power numbers to decrease in a real-world environment.
Considering that both the CULV+ION and the Atom D510 system are currently available on the market, I think these power numbers are more than fair. The AMD E-350 is able to sit idle at less than half of the SU2300+ION combination and 76% less power than the Atom D510 – very impressive results.
Under a complete load of the CPU cores only, the D510 Atom and the E-350 AMD APU used very similar amounts of power. However, the performance of the AMD part was definitely higher, making it an easy win for performance/watt competitions. And even though the CULV Celeron CPU is a bit faster than the AMD E-350, its power consumption numbers are about 50% higher which is a huge difference in the world of mobile computing.
This is where things look even better for the E-350 as it is not only able to offer playable, but modest, gaming experiences on its platform but it is doing it at a lower cost and lower power draw than the CULV+ION combination as well.
i am curious to see E-350 in
i am curious to see E-350 in an other O.S with openCL sup.