E-300 vs Phenom II X4 N970

VS

Primary details

Comparing Phenom II X4 N970 and E-300 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2433not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Series4x AMD Phenom IIAMD E-Series
Power efficiency2.80no data
Architecture codenameChamplain (2010−2011)Zacate (2011−2013)
Release date16 December 2010 (13 years ago)22 August 2011 (13 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Phenom II X4 N970 and E-300 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Boost clock speed2.2 GHz1.3 GHz
Bus rate3600 MHzno data
L1 cache512 KB64K (per core)
L2 cache2 MB512K (per core)
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm40 nm
Die sizeno data75 mm2
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Phenom II X4 N970 and E-300 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 configurationno data1
SocketS1FT1
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt18 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X4 N970 and E-300. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SVM

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom II X4 N970 and E-300 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom II X4 N970 and E-300. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon HD 6310

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.

Phenom II X4 N970 1647
+386%
E-300 339

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.

Phenom II X4 N970 263
+199%
E-300 88

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.

Phenom II X4 N970 934
+514%
E-300 152

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.

Phenom II X4 N970 1861
+118%
E-300 853

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.

Phenom II X4 N970 6811
+479%
E-300 1176

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.

Phenom II X4 N970 3043
+263%
E-300 839

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Phenom II X4 N970 17.8
+344%
E-300 79

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.

Phenom II X4 N970 3
+421%
E-300 0

Pros & cons summary


Recency 16 December 2010 22 August 2011
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 45 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 18 Watt

Phenom II X4 N970 has 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

E-300, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 8 months, a 12.5% more advanced lithography process, and 94.4% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Phenom II X4 N970 and E-300. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X4 N970 and E-300, 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 Phenom II X4 N970
Phenom II X4 N970
AMD E-300
E-300

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.


4.4 72 votes

Rate Phenom II X4 N970 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.4 303 votes

Rate E-300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Phenom II X4 N970 or E-300, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.