Athlon 64 X2 3800+ vs E1-6010

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

E1-6010
2014
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.34
Athlon 64 X2 3800+
2005
2 cores / 2 threads, 89 Watt
0.40
+17.6%

Athlon 64 X2 3800+ outperforms E1-6010 by a moderate 18% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing E1-6010 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+ processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking30813014
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD E-Seriesno data
Power efficiency3.220.43
Architecture codenameBeema (2014)Manchester (2005−2006)
Release date29 April 2014 (10 years ago)August 2005 (19 years ago)

Detailed specifications

E1-6010 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 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
Boost clock speed1.35 GHz2 GHz
L1 cacheno data256K
L2 cache1024 KB512 KB
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography28 nm90 nm
Die size107 mm2220 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)90 °Cno data
Number of transistorsno data154 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on E1-6010 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 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
SocketFT3b939
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt89 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by E1-6010 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVXno data
AES-NI+-
FMAFMA4-
AVX+-
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
VirusProtect+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by E1-6010 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+ are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
IOMMU 2.0+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by E1-6010 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data
Max memory channels1no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R2 Graphicsno data
Enduro+-
Switchable graphics+-
UVD+-
VCE+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of E1-6010 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+ integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by E1-6010 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+ integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by E1-6010 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes8no 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.

E1-6010 0.34
Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 0.40
+17.6%

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.

E1-6010 534
Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 629
+17.8%

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.

E1-6010 128
Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 203
+58.6%

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.

E1-6010 219
Athlon 64 X2 3800+ 376
+71.7%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.34 0.40
Chip lithography 28 nm 90 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 89 Watt

E1-6010 has a 221.4% more advanced lithography process, and 790% lower power consumption.

Athlon 64 X2 3800+, on the other hand, has a 17.6% higher aggregate performance score.

The Athlon 64 X2 3800+ is our recommended choice as it beats the E1-6010 in performance tests.

Be aware that E1-6010 is a notebook processor while Athlon 64 X2 3800+ is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between E1-6010 and Athlon 64 X2 3800+, 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.


AMD E1-6010
E1-6010
AMD Athlon 64 X2 3800+
Athlon 64 X2 3800+

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.


2.3 562 votes

Rate E1-6010 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 94 votes

Rate Athlon 64 X2 3800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about E1-6010 or Athlon 64 X2 3800+, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.