E2-3000M vs Celeron M P4500

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron M P4500
2010
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.62
+47.6%
E2-3000M
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.42

Celeron M P4500 outperforms E2-3000M by a considerable 48% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M P4500 and E2-3000M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking27932985
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron MAMD E-Series
Power efficiency1.681.13
Architecture codenameArrandale (2010−2011)Llano (2011−2012)
Release date1 April 2010 (14 years ago)20 December 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$86no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron M P4500 and E2-3000M 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 data1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed1.86 GHz2.4 GHz
Bus rate2500 MHzno data
L1 cache128 KB128 KB (per core)
L2 cache512 KB512K (per core)
L3 cache2 MB0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size81+114 mm2228 mm2
Maximum core temperature90 °Cno data
Number of transistors382+177 Million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M P4500 and E2-3000M 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 configurationno data1
SocketPGA988FS1
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M P4500 and E2-3000M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataSSE4.1/2, 3DNow, Radeon HD 6380G

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M P4500 and E2-3000M are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M P4500 and E2-3000M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon HD 6380G

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 M P4500 0.62
+47.6%
E2-3000M 0.42

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.

Celeron M P4500 2533
+58.6%
E2-3000M 1597

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Celeron M P4500 4826
+60.1%
E2-3000M 3014

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.62 0.42
Recency 1 April 2010 20 December 2011

Celeron M P4500 has a 47.6% higher aggregate performance score.

E2-3000M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year.

The Celeron M P4500 is our recommended choice as it beats the E2-3000M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M P4500 and E2-3000M, 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 M P4500
Celeron M P4500
AMD E2-3000M
E2-3000M

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 11 votes

Rate Celeron M P4500 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 54 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M P4500 or E2-3000M, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.