E-300 vs Athlon 64 TF-20
Primary details
Comparing Athlon 64 TF-20 and E-300 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD Athlon 64 | AMD E-Series |
| Architecture codename | Sherman (2009) | Zacate (2011−2013) |
| Release date | 1 May 2009 (15 years ago) | 22 August 2011 (13 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Athlon 64 TF-20 and E-300 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 1 (Single-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 1 | 2 |
| Boost clock speed | 1.6 GHz | 1.3 GHz |
| Bus rate | 667 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 0.1 MB | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 40 nm |
| Die size | no data | 75 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 95 °C | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Athlon 64 TF-20 and E-300 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | no data | 1 |
| Socket | S1g1 | FT1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 18 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Athlon 64 TF-20 and E-300. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX, 3DNow!, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, AMD64, Enhanced Virus Protection | MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SVM |
| VirusProtect | + | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Athlon 64 TF-20 and E-300 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Athlon 64 TF-20 and E-300. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon HD 6310 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core
Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.
3DMark06 CPU
3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 May 2009 | 22 August 2011 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 2 |
| Threads | 1 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 25 Watt | 18 Watt |
E-300 has an age advantage of 2 years, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 62.5% more advanced lithography process, and 38.9% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Athlon 64 TF-20 and E-300. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Athlon 64 TF-20 and E-300, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
