3020e vs Celeron E3200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron E3200
2009
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.55

3020e outperforms Celeron E3200 by a whopping 189% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron E3200 and 3020e processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking28482119
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.88no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD Raven Ridge (Ryzen 2000 APU)
Power efficiency0.7724.16
Architecture codenameWolfdale (2008−2010)Dali (Zen) (2020)
Release date30 August 2009 (15 years ago)4 August 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$52no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron E3200 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 speed2.4 GHz1.2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz2.6 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)192 KB
L2 cache1 MB (shared)1 MB
L3 cache0 KB4 MB
Chip lithography45 nm14 nm
Die size82 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature74 °C105 °C
Number of transistors228 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron E3200 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
SocketLGA775FT5
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron E3200 and 3020e. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, 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-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-

Security technologies

Celeron E3200 and 3020e 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 E3200 and 3020e are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron E3200 and 3020e. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR4

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)AMD Radeon RX Vega 3

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron E3200 and 3020e.

PCIe version2.0no 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 E3200 0.55
3020e 1.59
+189%

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 E3200 839
3020e 2439
+191%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.55 1.59
Recency 30 August 2009 4 August 2020
Chip lithography 45 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 6 Watt

3020e has a 189.1% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 983.3% lower power consumption.

The 3020e is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron E3200 in performance tests.

Note that Celeron E3200 is a desktop processor while 3020e is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron E3200 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 E3200
Celeron E3200
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.


3.1 75 votes

Rate Celeron E3200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 811 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 E3200 or 3020e, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.