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
Final Words
We'll start with the good news first. The Athlon II X3 435, priced at $87, is a better buy than any of the similarly priced Intel dual-core processors. In heavily threaded applications it's even faster than the more expensive Core 2 Duo E7500. Compared to Intel, the X3 435 is a clear value leader.
The problem is compared to AMD, the Athlon II X3 435 isn't that impressive. The Athlon II X4 620 is faster in nearly every multithreaded benchmark, and it's only costs $12 more. It's only in games and other lightly threaded applications where the 435's higher default clock speed makes up for its lack of a fourth core.
The Athlon II X3 435 is about $15 more expensive than it should be to make sense in AMD's lineup. It's a great step between the dual and quad-core options, but if you need the performance you're probably better off with the 620.
You do get better overclocking potential (thanks to lower thermal output of only three cores), but bring overclocking into the mix and you can narrow the clock speed gap with an overclocked 620.
Compared to Intel, I like the Athlon II X3 435. Compared to AMD, I'd take a quad-core 620.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
177 Comments
View All Comments
maddoctor - Tuesday, October 20, 2009 - link
It's funny how some people here are trying to guesstimate. I'm not an AMDiot like snakeoil.kiwik - Tuesday, October 20, 2009 - link
Exactly, you're the omega to his alpha, whatever that means.maddoctor - Tuesday, October 20, 2009 - link
Whatever, please you must notice that everyone in Intel Investorhub website and AiMeD Corporation blogs have been talk like me that AMD will be doomed with its own not so competence in developing its products.kiwik - Tuesday, October 20, 2009 - link
Cool story bro.qwertymac93 - Tuesday, October 20, 2009 - link
you suck at english...and life 0_0maddoctor - Tuesday, October 20, 2009 - link
I don't care about it becaue I can't make any change with my comment.maddoctor - Tuesday, October 20, 2009 - link
I don't care your suggestion. I could not edit my previous comment.RubberJohnny - Tuesday, October 20, 2009 - link
I didn't want to stoop to your level but...you speak the truth.Maddoctor you are a retard...have fun paying $1000 for your i3 when your intel monopoly wet dream comes true.
maddoctor - Tuesday, October 20, 2009 - link
Intel products are cheaper. Price/performance ration is more favourable to Intel products. Only AMDiot will like AMD products. And Intel is not monopoly, this is the nature capitalism folks, if you don't have any competitive product, it is a grant to a company with the best product to crush you.tamalero - Wednesday, October 21, 2009 - link
lol, this guy is for Intel-AMD what silicondoc was for ATI-NVIDIA.I wonder if Dailytech checked if its the same troll.