Small dual cores were crap, both AMD and Intels. You need at least 4 cores if you run small cores, otherwise windows will slow down to a crawl.
Not at all, even perf/watt wise they were globally better than Baytrail..
https://www.hardware.fr/articles/921-6/consommation.html
Keep in mind that they disabled the Lan on the Baytrail mobo to save 1W, lol, on the other hand not only the AM1 MB Lan wasnt disabled but it use an additional chip for more Sata ports as well as an additional chip to increase the USB ports number...
The lower power of the Celeron is due to the lower throughput, you can do the maths knowing that 10% less perf increase perf/watt by an equivalent amount...
The only current downside of this plateform is that it s not up to Bristol Ridge/Stoney Ridge when it comes to the UVD, albeit most of those news features are generally, if not always, useless.
As for this FM2+ Carrizo it should perform like an Athlon 200GE and sometimes even better with some softwares, for comparison the Excavator based A10 9800E is clocked at 3.1GHz :
https://www.computerbase.de/2018-09/amd-athlon-200ge-test/2/#abschnitt_benchmarks_in_anwendungen
Not enterely true, Bay Trail uses less power because it has lower perf and less features? YES, but thats what make them unsuitable for what they were designed for, if Bay Trail would have never existed, they would have been a success, and AM1 may have never existed.
Look, i have cheap chinese Z3735F tablet, you know what it uses for cooling? a paper thin aluminium sheet that covers the PCB, it mantains 1582mhz ACT CPU only turbo, CPU+IGP it goes back to 1333mhz.
Im still using it, it is quite impressive for what it is... when was new the battery lasted around 6 hours depending on use, CPU perf is similar to a 1300mhz Sempron 3850 and IGP performs petty much like an E-350 bobcat. PSU is a 9v 2000ma.
Kabini could not compite with that... yes it had more features and performance, but Bay Trail had just enoght performance to make it irrelevant.
not to mention the Z3735F rival was the Temash A4-1200, im petty sure NONE of the Temash could perform better than the Z3735F that was the slower Atom for tablets.
Temash was a dissaster, and Kabini ran on low clocks, except for the top 2, that allowed Intel to re-gain the market that was lost to Bobcats with Bay Trails.
Thats why they had to launch it on desktop were:
1) They had no room, FM2 was covering the low end well with A4-4000, A4-6300, A4-7300 and A6s.
2) Single Channel killed IGP performance even compared to the slowest SKL Celeron.
AMD kinda fixed most of this with Carrizo-L and Stoney Ridge, but Intel improved a lot as well.
As for this A8-7680, for gaming its going to be better for sure, in some cases the 200GE losses to the A6-9500... CPU perf its going to be close, but the bad ST is what kills it.
At any rate, 4C, cheap MB, cheap rams and W7 w/32bit support are the most important points.