AMD's Athlon II X3 435 & New Energy Efficient CPUs: Killing Intel Below $90
by Anand Lal Shimpi on October 20, 2009 12:00 AM EST- Posted in
- CPUs
DivX 8.5.3 with Xmpeg 5.0.3
Our DivX test is the same DivX / XMpeg 5.03 test we've run for the past few years now, the 1080p source file is encoded using the unconstrained DivX profile, quality/performance is set balanced at 5 and enhanced multithreading is enabled:
DivX encoding performance is hot on the heels of the Athlon II X4 620, but still slower. Once more we're about the same speed as the Phenom II X3 720.
x264 HD Video Encoding Performance
Graysky's x264 HD test uses the publicly available x264 codec (open source alternative to H.264) to encode a 4Mbps 720p MPEG-2 source. The focus here is on quality rather than speed, thus the benchmark uses a 2-pass encode and reports the average frame rate in each pass.
x264 encoding performance is noticeably slower than the quad-core offerings. Even the 2.3GHz 605e is faster than the X3 435. Compared to the equivalently priced dual-core options from Intel however, the Athlon II X3 435 is without a doubt the chip to get. If you're encoding video however, you're probably better springing for the $99 quad-core.
Windows Media Encoder 9 x64 Advanced Profile
In order to be codec agnostic we've got a Windows Media Encoder benchmark looking at the same sort of thing we've been doing in the DivX and x264 tests, but using WME instead.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
177 Comments
View All Comments
maddoctor - Tuesday, October 20, 2009 - link
Yes, Intel Core I5 is the best choice. No sophisticated AMD products, and it will never be. Don't buy AMD rubbish products.Ezz777 - Tuesday, October 20, 2009 - link
Not quite what i was getting at - but thanks for your input...I guess my question isn't really Athlon II X3 related but more 'concepts in PC building' so apologies for going OT.
If anyone does want to respond - my question is along the lines of if we assume linearity in the CPU and GPU markets, is there a ratio on how much you should spend on each to get a balanced gaming PC?
fsdetained - Wednesday, October 21, 2009 - link
That's a horrible way to go about buying parts as you'll just screw yourself in the end.I would only buy an athlon II for entry level gaming. It would do ok with more demanding games but the games are starting to catch up with current tech finally. Phenom II or I5/I7 would be for the more serious gamers.
maddoctor - Tuesday, October 20, 2009 - link
Hey, AMD could not make any processor approriately like Intel. Even AMD will not make any processor soon because AMD will bankrupt. AMD is whining too much and must be punished. Intel products are better than any AMD products.RadnorHarkonnen - Tuesday, October 20, 2009 - link
Can somebody ban this one, it is getting really disrupting.Beyond just behing plain dumb, somebody tell this tool chipmakers aren't football teams. Not that is very bright to discuss like this about football teams.
Gary Key - Tuesday, October 20, 2009 - link
Done...RubberJohnny - Tuesday, October 20, 2009 - link
The next few months will be very interesting for AMD, soon they will have the i3 to compete with in this market so pricing will become very important and Nvidia (possibly) about to put some heat on them in the graphics department...hang in there little fella!rippley007 - Tuesday, October 20, 2009 - link
The huge problem with this is STREET prices of CURRENT Intel cpu's.Less than 7 days ago, in a STORE mind you, i just purchased a q9550 CPU. for $169.. Quad core 2.83 ghz, 12mb cache, looks/acts/IS a much better price /performance, AT $169.. That is hard to beat
maddoctor - Tuesday, October 20, 2009 - link
Look, this is the facts that Intel is much better in price/performance ratio.fsdetained - Wednesday, October 21, 2009 - link
It had to be a return, open box, or a going out of business sale because even newegg has it listed for $269 and they pretty much always whoop store's prices. No way he got it by normal means at that price.For $179.99 you can get an AMD Phenom IIx4 955 Black Edition which is about on par performance wise as a q9550. That's $90 you're saving for the same performance.