E2-3000 vs Celeron E3500

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron E3500
2010
2 cores / 2 threads, 65 Watt
0.59
+28.3%
E2-3000
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.46

Celeron E3500 outperforms E2-3000 by a significant 28% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron E3500 and E2-3000 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking28012926
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.99no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD E-Series
Power efficiency0.862.90
Architecture codenameWolfdale (2008−2010)Kabini (2013−2014)
Release date29 August 2010 (14 years ago)23 May 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$62no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron E3500 and E2-3000 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 speed2.7 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2.7 GHz1.65 GHz
L1 cache64 KB (per core)no data
L2 cache1 MB (shared)1024 KB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm28 nm
Die size82 mm2246 mm2
Maximum core temperature74 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data90 °C
Number of transistors228 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range0.85V-1.3625Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron E3500 and E2-3000 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
SocketLGA775FT3
Power consumption (TDP)65 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron E3500 and E2-3000. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE2, Intel® SSE3, Intel® SSSE386x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX
AES-NI-+
FMA-FMA4
AVX-+
PowerNow-+
PowerGating-+
VirusProtect-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-

Security technologies

Celeron E3500 and E2-3000 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 E3500 and E2-3000 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d-no data
VT-x+no data
IOMMU 2.0-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron E3500 and E2-3000. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR3
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon HD 8280
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron E3500 and E2-3000 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron E3500 and E2-3000 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron E3500 and E2-3000.

PCIe version2.02.0

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 E3500 0.59
+28.3%
E2-3000 0.46

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 E3500 935
+28.8%
E2-3000 726

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.59 0.46
Recency 29 August 2010 23 May 2013
Chip lithography 45 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 65 Watt 15 Watt

Celeron E3500 has a 28.3% higher aggregate performance score.

E2-3000, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 2 years, a 60.7% more advanced lithography process, and 333.3% lower power consumption.

The Celeron E3500 is our recommended choice as it beats the E2-3000 in performance tests.

Note that Celeron E3500 is a desktop processor while E2-3000 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron E3500 and E2-3000, 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 E3500
Celeron E3500
AMD E2-3000
E2-3000

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.


3.3 27 votes

Rate Celeron E3500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 26 votes

Rate E2-3000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron E3500 or E2-3000, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.