E1-1200 vs Apple M4 (10 cores)
Aggregate performance score
Apple M4 (10 cores) outperforms E1-1200 by a whopping 9033% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing M4 (10 cores) and E1-1200 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 245 | 3197 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | Apple Apple M4 | AMD E-Series |
| Power efficiency | 52.22 | 1.27 |
| Architecture codename | no data | Zacate (2011−2013) |
| Release date | 7 May 2024 (less than a year ago) | 6 June 2012 (12 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
M4 (10 cores) and E1-1200 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 | 10 (Deca-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 10 | 2 |
| Boost clock speed | 4.4 GHz | 1.4 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 4 MB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 40 nm |
| Die size | no data | 75 mm2 |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 100 °C |
| Number of transistors | 28 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | no data | - |
Compatibility
Information on M4 (10 cores) and E1-1200 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 | no data | FT1 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 40 Watt | 18 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by M4 (10 cores) and E1-1200. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | MMX (+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A |
| PowerNow | - | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by M4 (10 cores) and E1-1200 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by M4 (10 cores) and E1-1200. 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 | Apple M4 10-core GPU | AMD Radeon HD 7310 |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 21.92 | 0.24 |
| Recency | 7 May 2024 | 6 June 2012 |
| Physical cores | 10 | 2 |
| Threads | 10 | 2 |
| Chip lithography | 3 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 40 Watt | 18 Watt |
Apple M4 (10 cores) has a 9033.3% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 years, 400% more physical cores and 400% more threads, and a 1233.3% more advanced lithography process.
E1-1200, on the other hand, has 122.2% lower power consumption.
The M4 (10 cores) is our recommended choice as it beats the E1-1200 in performance tests.
Note that Apple M4 (10 cores) is a desktop processor while E1-1200 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Apple M4 (10 cores) and E1-1200, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
