Testing

Cinbench 9.5

Cinebench is a free benchmarking tool based on 3D software CINEMA 4D, so the test results usually give good overall system results, especially if we’re talking about a processor, multi-processor systems or multi-core processors.

In the table you can see the E2160 at  1800MHz, 2400MHz and 3400MHz, and AMD's dual core 3800+ X2 which was included just as a reference.

Cinebench 9.5	1 CPU	x CPU	Multiprocessor Speedup
Intel Core 2 Duo E2160 @ 1800MHz	295	540	x1.83
OC Intel Core 2 Duo E2160 @ 2400MHz	394	721	x1.82
OC Intel Core 2 Duo E2160 @ 3400MHz	553	1005	x1.82
AMD 3800+ X2 @ 2000MHz	293	545	x1.86
OC AMD 3800+ X2 @ 2400MHz	348	639	x1.83

Even at a lower speed setting the E2160 is on par with AMD 3800+ X2 processor. When running at 2.4GHz, Intel easily wins. Although the results of an over-clocked processor are not relevant, or comparable for that matter due to memory speeds; the memory on the over-clocked E2160 ran at 890MHz whereas AMDs memory was kept at 800, the results on the reference speeds still speak for themselves.

ScienceMark 2.0

ScienceMark 2.0 tests for mathematical algorithm processing performance, and in doing that it shows the processing power of a tested processor.

ScienceMark results show a slight advantage of C2D E2160 over AMD X2 3800+ processor, and you can see that ScienceMark relies on a pure processing power. Of course the over-clocked E2160 running at 3.4 GHz wins by a greater margin.

 

ScienceMark 2.0	Overall score
Intel Core 2 Duo E2160 @ 1800MHz	1027.21
OC Intel Core 2 Duo E2160 @ 2400MHz	1366.74
OC Intel Core 2 Duo E2160 @ 3400MHz	1881.18
AMD 3800+ X2 @ 2000MHz	1159.59
OC AMD 3800+ X2 @ 2400MHz	1326.10