A4-3310MX vs E2-3000M

VS

Aggregate performance score

E2-3000M
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.42
A4-3310MX
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 35 Watt
0.49
+16.7%

A4-3310MX outperforms E2-3000M by a moderate 17% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing E2-3000M and A4-3310MX processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking29852900
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD E-SeriesAMD A-Series
Power efficiency1.131.32
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Llano (2011−2012)
Release date20 December 2011 (13 years ago)14 June 2011 (13 years ago)

Detailed specifications

E2-3000M and A4-3310MX 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 speed1.8 GHz2.1 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz2.5 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)128 KB (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)1 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size228 mm2228 mm2
Number of transistors1,178 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on E2-3000M and A4-3310MX 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
SocketFS1FS1
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by E2-3000M and A4-3310MX. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsSSE4.1/2, 3DNow, Radeon HD 6380G3DNow!, MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSE4a, Radeon HD 6480G

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by E2-3000M and A4-3310MX are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by E2-3000M and A4-3310MX. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 6380GAMD Radeon HD 6480G (444 MHz)

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.

E2-3000M 0.42
A4-3310MX 0.49
+16.7%

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.

E2-3000M 668
A4-3310MX 782
+17.1%

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.

E2-3000M 231
A4-3310MX 292
+26.4%

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.

E2-3000M 426
A4-3310MX 502
+17.8%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.42 0.49
Integrated graphics card 0.52 0.66
Recency 20 December 2011 14 June 2011

E2-3000M has an age advantage of 6 months.

A4-3310MX, on the other hand, has a 16.7% higher aggregate performance score, and 26.9% faster integrated GPU.

The A4-3310MX is our recommended choice as it beats the E2-3000M in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between E2-3000M and A4-3310MX, 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 E2-3000M
E2-3000M
AMD A4-3310MX
A4-3310MX

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.


2.9 54 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.7 29 votes

Rate A4-3310MX on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about E2-3000M or A4-3310MX, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.