E-240 vs Celeron 440

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 440
2007
1 core / 1 thread, 35 Watt
0.23
+91.7%

Celeron 440 outperforms E-240 by an impressive 92% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 440 and E-240 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31733339
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD E-Series
Power efficiency0.620.63
Architecture codenameConroe-L (2007−2008)Zacate (2011−2013)
Release dateJune 2007 (17 years ago)4 January 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$40no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 440 and E-240 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 cores1 (Single-Core)1 (Single-Core)
Threads11
Base clock speed2 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2 GHz1.5 GHz
L1 cache64 KB64 KB
L2 cache512 KB512 KB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography65 nm40 nm
Die size77 mm275 mm2
Maximum core temperature60 °Cno data
Number of transistors105 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range1V-1.3375Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 440 and E-240 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 configuration11
SocketLGA775FT1 BGA 413-Ball
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt18 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 440 and E-240. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-V
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States-no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Demand Based Switching-no data
FSB parity-no data

Security technologies

Celeron 440 and E-240 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 440 and E-240 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d-no data
VT-x-no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 440 and E-240. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR3 Single-channel

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD 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.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

Celeron 440 0.23
+91.7%
E-240 0.12

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

Celeron 440 368
+88.7%
E-240 195

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.23 0.12
Chip lithography 65 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 18 Watt

Celeron 440 has a 91.7% higher aggregate performance score.

E-240, on the other hand, has a 62.5% more advanced lithography process, and 94.4% lower power consumption.

The Celeron 440 is our recommended choice as it beats the E-240 in performance tests.

Note that Celeron 440 is a desktop processor while E-240 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 440 and E-240, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Celeron 440
Celeron 440
AMD E-240
E-240

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.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


2.6 59 votes

Rate Celeron 440 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 55 votes

Rate E-240 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 440 or E-240, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.