3015e vs Celeron 430

VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 430 and 3015e processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated2036
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD Raven Ridge (Ryzen 2000 APU)
Power efficiencyno data26.90
Architecture codenameConroe-L (2007−2008)Pollock (Zen) (2020)
Release dateJune 2007 (17 years ago)4 August 2020 (4 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$50no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron 430 and 3015e 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 cores1 (Single-Core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads14
Base clock speed1.8 GHz1.2 GHz
Boost clock speed1.8 GHz2.3 GHz
L1 cache64 KB192 KB
L2 cache512 KB1 MB
L3 cache0 KB4 MB
Chip lithography65 nm14 nm
Die size77 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature60 °C105 °C
Number of transistors105 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage range1V-1.3375Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 430 and 3015e 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 configuration1no data
SocketLGA775FT5
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt6 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 430 and 3015e. 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, SMT, CPB, AES-NI, RDRAND, RDSEED, SHA, SME
AES-NI-+
FMA-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States-no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Demand Based Switching-no data
FSB parity-no data

Security technologies

Celeron 430 and 3015e technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron 430 and 3015e are enumerated here.

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

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 430 and 3015e. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR4

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon RX Vega 3

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.

Celeron 430 280
3015e 2712
+869%

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 430 155
3015e 539
+248%

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 430 160
3015e 969
+506%

Pros & cons summary


Physical cores 1 2
Threads 1 4
Chip lithography 65 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 6 Watt

3015e has 100% more physical cores and 300% more threads, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 483.3% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron 430 and 3015e. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that Celeron 430 is a desktop processor while 3015e is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 430 and 3015e, 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 430
Celeron 430
AMD 3015e
3015e

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.


2.6 159 votes

Rate Celeron 430 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 29 votes

Rate 3015e on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 430 or 3015e, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.