E2-3000 vs Celeron 1047UE

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 1047UE
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 17 Watt
0.47
+2.2%
E2-3000
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.46

Celeron 1047UE outperforms E2-3000 by a minimal 2% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 1047UE and E2-3000 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking29272941
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD E-Series
Power efficiency2.622.90
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Kabini (2013−2014)
Release date20 January 2013 (11 years ago)23 May 2013 (11 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$134no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 1047UE and E2-3000 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 speed1.4 GHz1.65 GHz
L1 cache64K (per core)no data
L2 cache256K (per core)1024 KB
L3 cache2 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography22 nm28 nm
Die size118 mm2246 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)105 °C90 °C
Number of transistors1,400 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 1047UE and E2-3000 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
SocketIntel BGA1023FT3
Power consumption (TDP)17 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 1047UE and E2-3000. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno data86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX
AES-NI-+
FMA-FMA4
AVX-+
PowerNow-+
PowerGating-+
VirusProtect-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-

Security technologies

Celeron 1047UE and E2-3000 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 1047UE and E2-3000 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x+no data
IOMMU 2.0-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 1047UE and E2-3000. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics (Ivy Bridge) (350 - 900 MHz)AMD Radeon HD 8280
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron 1047UE and E2-3000 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron 1047UE and E2-3000 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 1047UE and E2-3000.

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.


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.

Celeron 1047UE 0.47
+2.2%
E2-3000 0.46

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.

Celeron 1047UE 748
+3%
E2-3000 726

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.47 0.46
Integrated graphics card 0.63 0.67
Recency 20 January 2013 23 May 2013
Chip lithography 22 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 17 Watt 15 Watt

Celeron 1047UE has a 2.2% higher aggregate performance score, and a 27.3% more advanced lithography process.

E2-3000, on the other hand, has 6.3% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 4 months, and 13.3% lower power consumption.

Given the minimal performance differences, no clear winner can be declared between Celeron 1047UE and E2-3000.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 1047UE and E2-3000, 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.


Intel Celeron 1047UE
Celeron 1047UE
AMD E2-3000
E2-3000

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.


No user ratings yet.

Rate Celeron 1047UE on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 26 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 1047UE or E2-3000, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.