Why AMD Athlon Neo x2 L335 score higher than AMD Turion Neo x2 L625?

[Unc]

I'm looking at HP's new ultralight DM3Z NOTEBOOK. With the Athlon L335 configuration and the same graphics (ATI Radeon HD 3200) the Turion L625 costs $50 more. From the searchable chart posted, the Athlon has a score of 873 while the Turion is only 834. What gives? Both processors are Dual Core @ 1.6 GHz.

Any response will be appreciated.

[Michael (Passmark)]

The charts are generated by averaging together user submitted data. Both processors have a low number of submitted samples (less than 30) meaning that the score given is not as reliable as it could be, although with over 15 it should be roughly correct.

That being said the difference in score between these two is less than 5%. This is a very small difference and probably wouldn't be noticeable anywhere outside of artificial benchmarking software like PerformanceTest.

I'm not all that familiar with the differences between these two processors. There might be some reason other than pure speed why one is more costly. For instance the more expensive one might be a more power efficient model (longer battery life in a notebook). Or it might be that the cheaper one simply is the better deal, it isn't unheard of for cheaper CPUs to be the better ones.

While the charts will give you a good general idea of a CPUs comparative speed (in this case these two are almost identical) it may not always tell the whole story and as with any hardware purchase I would suggest using multiple sources of information on which to base your decision.

[Unc]

Thanks Michael for your quick response.

Looks like I'll go for the Athlon if I settle on a DM3Z Notebook.