CPU Comparison

The Intel Processor N150 and AMD Phenom II X6 1075T occupy the same overall performance tier, with average benchmark scores of 1025 and 1024 respectively, a difference of only 0.1%. Both sit at the 28th percentile of all CPUs. However, their performance profiles could hardly be more different. The N150 dominates in single-threaded workloads, posting a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 935 against the Phenom’s 420, a 122.6% advantage. Yet the Phenom wins in modern multi-threaded rendering, scoring 2975 in Cinebench R23 multi-core versus the N150’s 2590.5, a 12.9% lead. The verdict depends entirely on workload. For everyday responsiveness, office tasks, and older applications that rely on high single-core speed, the N150 is the clear choice. For multi-threaded rendering or encoding tasks that scale across cores, the Phenom’s six physical cores provide a measurable edge. The N150’s 6-watt TDP and active production status make it suitable for current low-power mobile systems, while the Phenom’s 125-watt TDP and end-of-life status restrict it to older desktop platforms.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors spans over a decade of silicon development. The Intel Processor N150 uses the Twin Lake architecture, built on a 10 nm process at Intel’s own foundries. It belongs to the Intel Processor (Alder Lake-N) generation and features four cores with four threads. The Phenom II X6 1075T uses AMD’s K10 architecture, codenamed Thuban, fabricated on a 45 nm process at GlobalFoundries. It contains six cores and six threads. The transistor counts reflect the generational divide: the Phenom packs 904 million transistors into a 346 mm² die, while the N150’s transistor count and die size are not listed in the available data.

Cache structures differ substantially. The N150 allocates 96 KB of L1 cache per core and shares 2 MB of L2 cache across all cores, plus 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Phenom provides 128 KB of L1 per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, with 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The N150’s integrated graphics are the UHD Graphics 730, whereas the Phenom relies on chipset-based graphics on certain motherboards rather than an integrated GPU. Memory support also diverges: the N150 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 over a single-channel memory bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the Phenom supports DDR2 and DDR3 over a dual-channel bus with 21.3 GB/s bandwidth. The N150 uses PCIe Gen 3 with 9 lanes from the CPU, while the Phenom uses PCIe Gen 2. ECC memory is supported on the Phenom but not on the N150.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results reveal a split personality. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the N150 scores 422.5 against the Phenom’s 299, giving the Intel part a 41.3% victory. This older benchmark appears to favor the N150’s architecture despite having fewer cores. Moving to Cinebench R23 multi-core, the tables turn. The Phenom scores 2975, beating the N150’s 2590.5 by 12.9%. The R23 workload is more demanding and apparently scales better with the Phenom’s two additional physical cores. The single-core comparison is the most lopsided result. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the N150 scores 935 versus the Phenom’s 420, a 122.6% margin. This massive gap underscores the N150’s modern core design and much higher boost clock relative to its base.

The N150 wins two of the three head-to-head tests, but the Phenom wins the one that matters most for sustained multi-threaded work in current software. The R15 multi-core result is notable because it contradicts the R23 outcome, suggesting the N150’s advantage in older multi-threaded tests may stem from better memory latency or instruction handling rather than raw core count. The Phenom’s R23 multi-core win indicates that newer rendering engines extract more parallelism from its six cores. Single-core performance tells a straightforward story: the N150’s 3.60 GHz boost clock against the Phenom’s 3.50 GHz boost is nearly identical, yet the architectural efficiency difference produces a 122.6% score gap.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Processor N150 has an average benchmark score of 1025, while the AMD Phenom II X6 1075T has 1024. The difference is 0.1%, placing them in the same performance tier.

Q: How do they compare in single-core performance?

A: The N150 is dramatically faster. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the N150 scores 935 versus the Phenom’s 420, a 122.6% advantage for the Intel part.

Q: Which processor wins in multi-core rendering?

A: The Phenom wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core, scoring 2975 against the N150’s 2590.5, a 12.9% lead. However, the N150 wins Cinebench R15 multi-core by 41.3%, scoring 422.5 to 299.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The N150 has 4 cores and 4 threads. The Phenom has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The N150 has a TDP of 6 watts, while the Phenom has a TDP of 125 watts.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Phenom II X6 1075T supports ECC memory. The Intel Processor N150 does not support ECC memory.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Processor N150 wins in single-threaded performance by a wide margin, making it the better choice for applications that rely on per-core speed. Its 122.6% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core suggests superior responsiveness for everyday tasks like web browsing, document editing, and legacy software that cannot utilize many cores. The N150 also wins in older multi-threaded benchmarks, as shown by its 41.3% advantage in Cinebench R15 multi-core. Its 6-watt TDP makes it suitable for fanless or ultra-low-power mobile designs, and its active production status means it is available for current systems. The integrated UHD Graphics 730 provides a complete platform without requiring a discrete GPU.

The AMD Phenom II X6 1075T wins in modern multi-threaded rendering, taking a 12.9% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core. This makes it the better choice for workloads like video encoding, 3D rendering, or compilation that scale across its six cores. The Phenom also supports ECC memory, which is valuable for users requiring error correction in their memory subsystem. Its dual-channel memory architecture, while lower in bandwidth at 21.3 GB/s, may benefit certain memory-latency-sensitive workloads. The Phenom’s higher base clock of 3.00 GHz versus the N150’s 0.10 GHz base clock means it delivers consistent performance without relying on boost states, which is relevant for sustained workloads.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Processor N150 | AMD Phenom II X6 1075T |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 4 | 6 |

| Threads | 4 | 6 |

| Base Clock | 0.10 GHz | 3.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.60 GHz | 3.50 GHz |

| TDP | 6 W | 125 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1264 | AMD Socket AM3 |

| Architecture | Twin Lake | K10 |

| Codename | Twin Lake | Thuban |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 45 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | GlobalFoundries |

| Transistors | Not listed | 904 million |

| Die Size | Not listed | 346 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 96 KB (per core) | 128 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 2 MB (shared) | 512 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5, LPDDR5 | DDR2, DDR3 |

| Memory Bus | Single-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 38.4 GB/s | 21.3 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 9 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 2 |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | On certain motherboards (Chipset feature) |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2024-11-19 | 2010-09-20 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | No |

| Part Number | SRPNR | HDT75TFBK6DGRHDT75TFBGRBOX |

The N150’s 10 nm process versus the Phenom’s 45 nm process explains the massive TDP difference: 6 watts against 125 watts. The N150’s base clock of 0.10 GHz is extraordinarily low, likely designed for idle power savings, with boost reaching 3.60 GHz. The Phenom’s base clock of 3.00 GHz and boost of 3.50 GHz are much closer together. The N150 supports newer memory types and higher bandwidth, while the Phenom retains ECC support. The N150 is an active mobile part released in 2024, while the Phenom is an end-of-life desktop part from 2010.