Pentium Dual-Core E2160 vs Athlon 64 X2 4600+
Aggregate performance score
Athlon 64 X2 4600+ outperforms Pentium Dual-Core E2160 by a moderate 10% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4600+ and Pentium Dual-Core E2160 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 2943 | 2998 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Series | 2x Athlon 64 (Desktop) | no data |
| Power efficiency | 0.65 | 0.59 |
| Architecture codename | Windsor (2006−2007) | Conroe (2006−2007) |
| Release date | no data | June 2007 (17 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $350 | no data |
Detailed specifications
Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4600+ and Pentium Dual-Core E2160 basic parameters such as 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) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 2 | 2 |
| Boost clock speed | 2.4 GHz | 1.8 GHz |
| Bus rate | 1000 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 256K | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 1 MB (shared) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 65 nm |
| Die size | 220 mm2 | 77 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 154 million | 105 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4600+ and Pentium Dual-Core E2160 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 | 939 | 775 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4600+ and Pentium Dual-Core E2160. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 X2 (Desktop) 4600+ and Pentium Dual-Core E2160. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
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. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.45 | 0.41 |
| Chip lithography | 90 nm | 65 nm |
Athlon 64 X2 4600+ has a 9.8% higher aggregate performance score.
Pentium Dual-Core E2160, on the other hand, has a 38.5% more advanced lithography process.
Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Athlon 64 X2 4600+ and Pentium Dual-Core E2160.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 X2 4600+ and Pentium Dual-Core E2160, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
