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.
Featured on Processors
Legion Hardware Reviews
From the Forums
Subscribe to TechSpot
Get free exclusive content, learn about new features and breaking tech news.