Select any two CPUs for comparison
VS

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Core Solo U1400 1.2GHz Athlon 64 Mobile 3200+
Cyberpunk 2077 3298% 1804%
Assassins Creed: Valhalla 4475% 2463%
Call of Duty: Black Ops Cold War 3193% 1745%
FIFA 21 3078% 1681%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 3749% 2056%
World of Warcraft: Shadowlands 5183% 2860%
Watch Dogs Legion 4475% 2463%
Horizon: Zero Dawn 3749% 2056%
Grand Theft Auto VI 5485% 3029%
Genshin Impact 2473% 1341%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the AMD Athlon 64 Mobile 3200+ is very slightly better than the Intel Core Solo U1400 1.2GHz when it comes to running the latest games. This also means it will be less likely to bottleneck more powerful GPUs, allowing them to achieve more of their gaming performance potential.

The Core Solo U1400 was released over a year more recently than the Athlon 64 Mobile, and so the Core Solo U1400 is likely to have better levels of support, and will be more optimized for running the latest games.

Both CPUs exhibit very poor performance, so rather than upgrading from one to the other you should consider looking at more powerful CPUs. Neither of these will be able to run the latest games in any playable way.

The Core Solo U1400 and the Athlon 64 Mobile both have 1 cores, and so are quite likely to struggle with the latest games, or at least bottleneck high-end graphics cards when running them. With a decent accompanying GPU, the Core Solo U1400 and the Athlon 64 Mobile may still be able to run slightly older games fairly effectively.

More important for gaming than the number of cores and threads is the clock rate. Problematically, unless the two CPUs are from the same family, this can only serve as a general guide and nothing like an exact comparison, because the clock cycles per instruction (CPI) will vary so much.

The Core Solo U1400 and Athlon 64 Mobile are not from the same family of CPUs, so their clock speeds are by no means directly comparable. Bear in mind, then, that while the Athlon 64 Mobile has a 0.8 GHz faster frequency, this is not always an indicator that it will be superior in performance, despite frequency being crucial when trying to avoid GPU bottlenecking. In this case, however, the difference is probably a good indicator that the is superior.

Aside from the clock rate, the next-most important CPU features for PC game performance are L2 and L3 cache size. Faster than RAM, the more cache available, the more data that can be stored for lightning-fast retrieval. L1 Cache is not usually an issue anymore for gaming, with most high-end CPUs eking out about the same L1 performance, and L2 is more important than L3 - but L3 is still important if you want to reach the highest levels of performance. Bear in mind that although it is better to have a larger cache, the larger it is, the higher the latency, so a balance has to be struck.

The Core Solo U1400 has a 1024 KB bigger L2 cache than the Athlon 64 Mobile, but neither of the CPUs have L3 caches, so the Core Solo U1400 wins out in this area with its larger L2 cache.

The maximum Thermal Design Power is the power in Watts that the CPU will consume in the worst case scenario. The lithography is the semiconductor manufacturing technology being used to create the CPU - the smaller this is, the more transistors that can be fit into the CPU, and the closer the connections. For both the lithography and the TDP, it is the lower the better, because a lower number means a lower amount of power is necessary to run the CPU, and consequently a lower amount of heat is produced.

The Core Solo U1400 has a 76 Watt lower Maximum TDP than the Athlon 64 Mobile, and was created with a 65 nm smaller manufacturing technology. What this means is the Core Solo U1400 will consume significantly less power and consequently produce less heat, enabling more prolonged computational tasks with fewer adverse effects. This will lower your yearly electricity bill significantly, as well as prevent you from having to invest in extra cooling mechanisms (unless you overclock).

CPU Core Details

CPU CodenameYonahClawHammer
MoBo SocketSocket 479Socket 754
Notebook CPUyesyes
Release Date23 Apr 200623 Sep 2003
CPU LinkGD LinkGD Link
Approved

CPU Technical Specifications

CPU Cores1vs1
Clock Speed1.2 GHzvs2 GHz
Turbo Frequency-vs-
Max TDP6 Wvs82 W
Lithography65 nmvs130 nm
Bit Width-vs-
Virtualization Technologynovsno
Comparison

CPU Cache and Memory

L1 Cache Size64 KBvs128 KB
L2 Cache Size2048 KBvs1024 KB
L3 Cache Size-vs-
ECC Memory Supportnovsno
Comparison

CPU Graphics

Graphicsnono

CPU Package and Version Specifications

Package Size-vs-
Revision-vs-
PCIe Revision-vs-
PCIe Configurations-vs-

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

CPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewYonah was the code name for (the core of) Intel's first generation of 65 nm process mobile microprocessors, based on the Banias/Dothan-core Pentium M microarchitecture. SIMD performance has been improved through the addition of SSE3 instructions and improvements to SSE and SSE2 implementations, while integer performance decreased slightly due to higher latency cache. Additionally, Yonah includes support for the NX bit.Previously introduced as Mobile Athlon 64, Turion 64 is now the brand name AMD applies to its 64-bit low-power consumption (mobile) processors. The Turion 64 and Turion 64 X2 processors compete with Intel's mobile processors, initially the Pentium M and currently the Intel Core and Intel Core 2 processors. Earlier Turion 64 processors are compatible with AMD's Socket 754. The newer Richmond models are designed for AMD's Socket S1. They are equipped with 512 or 1024?KB of L2 cache, a 64-bit single channel on-die memory controller, and an 800?MHz HyperTransport bus. Battery saving features, like PowerNow!, are central to the marketing and usefulness of these CPUs.