Apple M2 Max vs GX-210JA
Aggregate performance score
M2 Max outperforms GX-210JA by a whopping 10857% 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 | 3623 | 539 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD | Apple M-Series |
| Power efficiency | 0.98 | 8.19 |
| Designer | AMD | Apple |
| Architecture codename | Temash (2013) | no data |
| Release date | 23 May 2013 (12 years ago) | 17 January 2023 (3 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of GX-210JA and M2 Max: 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 2.424 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1 GHz | 3.7 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 3.3 MB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 36 MB |
| L3 cache | no data | 48 MB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 5 nm |
| Number of transistors | no data | 67000 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | no data |
Compatibility
Information on GX-210JA and M2 Max 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.
| Socket | FT3 BGA | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 79 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by GX-210JA and M2 Max. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | 86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX | no data |
| AES-NI | + | - |
| AVX | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by GX-210JA and M2 Max. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Apple M2 Max 38-Core GPU |
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 | 0.14 | 15.34 |
| Recency | 23 May 2013 | 17 January 2023 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 12 |
| Threads | 2 | 12 |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 5 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 6 Watt | 79 Watt |
GX-210JA has 1217% lower power consumption.
Apple M2 Max, on the other hand, has a 10857% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, 500% more physical cores and 500% more threads, and a 460% more advanced lithography process.
The Apple M2 Max is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD GX-210JA in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
