3020e vs Celeron 6305

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 6305
2020
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
1.31
3020e
2020
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
1.53
+16.8%

3020e outperforms Celeron 6305 by a moderate 17% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 6305 and 3020e processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking22752137
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Tiger LakeAMD Raven Ridge (Ryzen 2000 APU)
Power efficiency8.2624.12
Architecture codenameTiger Lake-U (2020)Dali (Zen) (2020)
Release date1 September 2020 (4 years ago)4 August 2020 (4 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron 6305 and 3020e 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 cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speedno data1.2 GHz
Boost clock speed1.8 GHz2.6 GHz
Bus rate4 GT/sno data
L1 cache160 KB192 KB
L2 cache2.5 MB1 MB
L3 cache4 MB4 MB
Chip lithography10 nm SuperFin14 nm
Maximum core temperature100 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 6305 and 3020e 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 configuration1no data
SocketFCBGA1449FT5
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 6305 and 3020e. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX++
Speed Shift+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Deep Learning Boost+-

Security technologies

Celeron 6305 and 3020e technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
SGX-no data
OS Guard+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 6305 and 3020e are enumerated here.

VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 6305 and 3020e. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4DDR4
Maximum memory size64 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel UHD Graphics for 11th Gen Intel ProcessorsAMD Radeon RX Vega 3 ( - 1000 MHz)
Quick Sync Video+-
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency1.25 GHzno data
Execution Units48no data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 6305 and 3020e integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported4no data

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by Celeron 6305 and 3020e integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

Max resolution over HDMI 1.44096x2304@60Hzno data
Max resolution over eDP4096x2304@60Hzno data
Max resolution over DisplayPort7680x4320@60Hzno data

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron 6305 and 3020e integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectX12.1no data
OpenGL4.6no data

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 6305 1.31
3020e 1.53
+16.8%

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 6305 2080
3020e 2433
+17%

GeekBench 5 Single-Core

GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.

Celeron 6305 750
+13.5%
3020e 661

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core

GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.

Celeron 6305 1264
+17.1%
3020e 1079

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Celeron 6305 39.12
3020e 29
+34.9%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Celeron 6305 161
3020e 196
+21.7%

Cinebench 15 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R15 (standing for Release 15) is a benchmark made by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version (sometimes called Single-Thread) only uses a single processor thread to render a room full of reflective spheres and light sources.

Celeron 6305 84
3020e 92
+9.6%

TrueCrypt AES

TrueCrypt is a discontinued piece of software that was widely used for on-the-fly-encryption of disk partitions, now superseded by VeraCrypt. It contains several embedded performance tests, one of them being TrueCrypt AES, which measures data encryption speed using AES algorithm. Result is encryption speed in gigabytes per second.

Celeron 6305 0.9
3020e 1.1
+19.6%

WinRAR 4.0

WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.

Celeron 6305 1210
3020e 1232
+1.8%

x264 encoding pass 2

x264 Pass 2 is a slower variant of x264 video compression that produces a variable bit rate output file, which results in better quality since the higher bit rate is used when it is needed more. Benchmark result is still measured in frames per second.  

Celeron 6305 11
3020e 13
+13.8%

x264 encoding pass 1

x264 version 4.0 is a video encoding benchmark uses MPEG 4 x264 compression method to compress a sample HD (720p) video. Pass 1 is a faster variant that produces a constant bit rate output file. Its result is measured in frames per second, which means how many frames of the source video file were encoded per second.  

Celeron 6305 62
3020e 65
+5.5%

Geekbench 5.5 Multi-Core

Celeron 6305 1198
+0.8%
3020e 1188

Blender(-)

Celeron 6305 2834
3020e 2964
+4.6%

Geekbench 5.5 Single-Core

Celeron 6305 638
3020e 638

7-Zip Single

Celeron 6305 2238
3020e 2597
+16.1%

7-Zip

Celeron 6305 4263
3020e 4963
+16.4%

WebXPRT 3

Celeron 6305 101
3020e 105
+4.3%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 1.31 1.53
Integrated graphics card 5.58 2.98
Chip lithography 10 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 6 Watt

Celeron 6305 has 87.2% faster integrated GPU, and a 40% more advanced lithography process.

3020e, on the other hand, has a 16.8% higher aggregate performance score, and 150% lower power consumption.

The 3020e is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 6305 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 6305 and 3020e, 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 6305
Celeron 6305
AMD 3020e
3020e

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.


3.5 149 votes

Rate Celeron 6305 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 815 votes

Rate 3020e on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 6305 or 3020e, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.