Celeron E3300 vs E2-3000M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing E2-3000M and Celeron E3300 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated2868
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data0.83
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD E-Seriesno data
Power efficiencyno data0.73
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Wolfdale (2008−2010)
Release date20 December 2011 (12 years ago)30 August 2009 (15 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$70

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

E2-3000M and Celeron E3300 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 GHz2.5 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz2.5 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)64 KB (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)1 MB (shared)
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm45 nm
Die size228 mm282 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data74 °C
Number of transistors1,178 million228 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data0.85V-1.3625V

Compatibility

Information on E2-3000M and Celeron E3300 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
SocketFS1LGA775
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt65 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by E2-3000M and Celeron E3300. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsSSE4.1/2, 3DNow, Radeon HD 6380Gno data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+

Security technologies

E2-3000M and Celeron E3300 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by E2-3000M and Celeron E3300 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data-
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by E2-3000M and Celeron E3300. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR1, DDR2, DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon HD 6380GOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by E2-3000M and Celeron E3300.

PCIe versionno data2.0

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.



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
Celeron E3300 795
+19%

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
Celeron E3300 248
+7.4%

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
+6%
Celeron E3300 402

Pros & cons summary


Recency 20 December 2011 30 August 2009
Chip lithography 32 nm 45 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 65 Watt

E2-3000M has an age advantage of 2 years, a 40.6% more advanced lithography process, and 85.7% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between E2-3000M and Celeron E3300. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that E2-3000M is a notebook processor while Celeron E3300 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between E2-3000M and Celeron E3300, 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
Intel Celeron E3300
Celeron E3300

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
3.3 177 votes

Rate Celeron E3300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about E2-3000M or Celeron E3300, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.