Atom E680 vs FX-9590
Aggregate performance score
FX-9590 outperforms Atom E680 by a whopping 4377% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1330 | 3651 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Power efficiency | 1.12 | 1.37 |
| Designer | AMD | Intel |
| Manufacturer | no data | Intel |
| Architecture codename | Vishera (2012−2015) | Tunnel Creek (2010) |
| Release date | 6 July 2013 (12 years ago) | 14 September 2010 (15 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of FX-9590 and Atom E680: number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 8 (Octa-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 2 |
| Base clock speed | 4.7 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 5 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 8192 KB | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 45 nm |
| Die size | 315 mm2 | 26 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 57 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,200 million | 47 million |
| 64 bit support | + | - |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | + | - |
| P0 Vcore voltage | Min: 1.375 V - Max: 1.5375 V | no data |
Compatibility
Information on FX-9590 and Atom E680 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | AM3+ | Intel BGA 676 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 220 Watt | 4 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-9590 and Atom E680. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | - |
| FMA | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-9590 and Atom E680 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-9590 and Atom E680. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR2 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel GMA 600 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-9590 and Atom E680.
| PCIe version | n/a | no data |
Synthetic benchmarks
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 5.82 | 0.13 |
| Recency | 6 July 2013 | 14 September 2010 |
| Physical cores | 8 | 1 |
| Threads | 8 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 32 nm | 45 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 220 Watt | 4 Watt |
FX-9590 has a 4377% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 2 years, 700% more physical cores and 300% more threads, and a 41% more advanced lithography process.
Atom E680, on the other hand, has 5400% lower power consumption.
The AMD FX-9590 is our recommended choice as it beats the Intel Atom E680 in performance tests.
Note that FX-9590 is a desktop processor while Atom E680 is a notebook one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
