3015e vs Celeron 570
Primary details
Comparing Celeron 570 and 3015e processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | not rated | 2036 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | no data | AMD Raven Ridge (Ryzen 2000 APU) |
| Power efficiency | no data | 26.90 |
| Architecture codename | no data | Pollock (Zen) (2020) |
| Release date | 1 April 2008 (16 years ago) | 4 August 2020 (4 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Celeron 570 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 cores | no data | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | no data | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 2.26 GHz | 1.2 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | no data | 2.3 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 192 KB |
| L2 cache | no data | 1 MB |
| L3 cache | 1 MB L2 Cache | 4 MB |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron 570 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.
| Socket | PPGA478 | FT5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 31 Watt | 6 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 570 and 3015e. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | MMX, 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 |
| Demand Based Switching | - | no data |
| FSB parity | - | no data |
Security technologies
Celeron 570 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 570 and 3015e are enumerated here.
| VT-x | - | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 570 and 3015e. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | no data | DDR4 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD 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.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 1 April 2008 | 4 August 2020 |
| Chip lithography | 65 nm | 14 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 31 Watt | 6 Watt |
3015e has an age advantage of 12 years, a 364.3% more advanced lithography process, and 416.7% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Celeron 570 and 3015e. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 570 and 3015e, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
