Synthetic 3D Performance

Here we see that despite both the E4300 and E2160 being clocked at 1.80GHz, the E4300 is actually slightly faster in 3Dmark2001 due to its larger 2MB L2 cache. The margins were not huge, though the E4300 was able to steal another few hundred points. At 1280x1024 the E2140 dropped a few thousand points behind the E2160.

3Dmark2006 showed a similar story, though the margins were smaller. In this 3D test the processors still had quite an impact as the E2140 was 19% slower than the E6420 at 1280x1024.

If you enjoy our content, please consider subscribing.
  • Ad-free TechSpot experience while supporting our work
  • Our promise: All reader contributions will go toward funding more content
  • That means: More tech features, more benchmarks and analysis