3020e vs Celeron 4205U

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 4205U
2019
2 cores / 2 threads, 15 Watt
0.86
3020e
2020
2 cores / 2 threads, 6 Watt
1.53
+77.9%

3020e outperforms Celeron 4205U by an impressive 78% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 4205U and 3020e processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking25742139
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel CeleronAMD Raven Ridge (Ryzen 2000 APU)
Power efficiency5.4324.13
Architecture codenameWhiskey Lake-U (2018−2019)Dali (Zen) (2020)
Release date23 January 2019 (5 years ago)4 August 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$107no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 4205U and 3020e 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 speedno data1.2 GHz
Boost clock speed1.8 GHz2.6 GHz
Bus typeOPIno data
Bus rate4 GT/sno data
Multiplier18no data
L1 cache128 KB192 KB
L2 cache512 KB1 MB
L3 cache2 MB (shared)4 MB
Chip lithography14 nm14 nm
Maximum core temperature100 °C105 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility++

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 4205U and 3020e 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 configuration1 (Uniprocessor)no data
SocketIntel BGA 1528FT5
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 4205U and 3020e. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, BMI2, ABM, FMA, ADX, SMEP, SMAP, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI++
FMA-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 4205U and 3020e are enumerated here.

VT-d+no data
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 4205U and 3020e. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3, DDR4DDR4
Maximum memory size32 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth38.397 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
Intel HD Graphics 610 (300 - 900 MHz)AMD Radeon RX Vega 3 ( - 1000 MHz)

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron 4205U and 3020e.

PCIe version3.0no data
PCI Express lanes12no data

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 4205U 0.86
3020e 1.53
+77.9%

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 4205U 1359
3020e 2433
+79%

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.

Celeron 4205U 354
3020e 661
+86.7%

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.

Celeron 4205U 600
3020e 1079
+79.8%

Cinebench 15 64-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 15 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R15 which uses all the processor threads.

Celeron 4205U 136
3020e 196
+44.1%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.86 1.53
Integrated graphics card 1.85 2.98
Recency 23 January 2019 4 August 2020
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 6 Watt

3020e has a 77.9% higher aggregate performance score, 61.1% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 1 year, and 150% lower power consumption.

The 3020e is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 4205U in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 4205U and 3020e, 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 4205U
Celeron 4205U
AMD 3020e
3020e

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.


3.1 130 votes

Rate Celeron 4205U on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 815 votes

Rate 3020e on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 4205U or 3020e, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.