Atom E3815 vs Celeron SU2300
Aggregate performance score
Celeron SU2300 outperforms Atom E3815 by a whopping 150% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Celeron SU2300 and Atom E3815 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3097 | 3349 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Atom |
| Power efficiency | 2.84 | 2.27 |
| Architecture codename | no data | Bay Trail-I (2013) |
| Release date | 1 July 2009 (15 years ago) | 8 October 2013 (11 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $134 |
Detailed specifications
Celeron SU2300 and Atom E3815 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 cores | no data | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | no data | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 1.2 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 1.47 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | no data | 512 KB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 1 MB | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 22 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| 64 bit support | - | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron SU2300 and Atom E3815 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 configuration | no data | 1 |
| Socket | BGA956 | Intel BGA1170 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 5 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron SU2300 and Atom E3815. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
Security technologies
Celeron SU2300 and Atom E3815 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron SU2300 and Atom E3815 are enumerated here.
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron SU2300 and Atom E3815. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | Intel HD Graphics |
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.30 | 0.12 |
| Recency | 1 July 2009 | 8 October 2013 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 22 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 5 Watt |
Celeron SU2300 has a 150% higher aggregate performance score.
Atom E3815, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 4 years, a 104.5% more advanced lithography process, and 100% lower power consumption.
The Celeron SU2300 is our recommended choice as it beats the Atom E3815 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron SU2300 and Atom E3815, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
