E-350 vs Celeron N2840

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron N2840
2014
2 cores / 2 threads, 7 Watt
0.37
+37%

Celeron N2840 outperforms E-350 by a substantial 37% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron N2840 and E-350 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking30413147
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD E-Series
Power efficiency5.001.42
Architecture codenameBay Trail-M (2013−2014)Zacate (2011−2013)
Release date22 May 2014 (10 years ago)4 January 2011 (13 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron N2840 and E-350 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 speed2.16 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2.58 GHz1.6 GHz
L1 cache56K (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography22 nm40 nm
Die sizeno data75 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C90 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron N2840 and E-350 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
SocketFCBGA1170FT1
Power consumption (TDP)7.5 Watt18 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron N2840 and E-350. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX (+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Smart Connect+no data

Security technologies

Celeron N2840 and E-350 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDB+no data
Secure Key+no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron N2840 and E-350 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 N2840 and E-350. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size8 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth21.32 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics for Intel Atom Processor Z3700 SeriesAMD Radeon HD 6310
Quick Sync Video+-
Graphics max frequency792 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron N2840 and E-350 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron N2840 and E-350.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes4no data
USB revision3.0 and 2.0no data
Total number of SATA ports2no data
Number of USB ports5no 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 N2840 0.37
+37%
E-350 0.27

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 N2840 588
+39.3%
E-350 422

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 N2840 178
+67.9%
E-350 106

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 N2840 297
+63.2%
E-350 182

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 N2840 1331
+26.9%
E-350 1049

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 N2840 2533
+26.3%
E-350 2005

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Celeron N2840 1510
+47.9%
E-350 1021

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.

Celeron N2840 1
+45.9%
E-350 1

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.37 0.27
Integrated graphics card 0.77 0.32
Recency 22 May 2014 4 January 2011
Chip lithography 22 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 7 Watt 18 Watt

Celeron N2840 has a 37% higher aggregate performance score, 140.6% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 3 years, a 81.8% more advanced lithography process, and 157.1% lower power consumption.

The Celeron N2840 is our recommended choice as it beats the E-350 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron N2840 and E-350, 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 N2840
Celeron N2840
AMD E-350
E-350

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.


2.7 660 votes

Rate Celeron N2840 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 396 votes

Rate E-350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron N2840 or E-350, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.