E2-2000 vs Celeron 900

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron 900
2009
35 Watt
0.26
E2-2000
2013
2 cores / 2 threads, 18 Watt
0.31
+19.2%

E2-2000 outperforms Celeron 900 by a moderate 19% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron 900 and E2-2000 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31373087
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD E-Series
Power efficiency0.701.63
Architecture codenameno dataZacate (2011−2013)
Release date1 January 2009 (15 years ago)6 January 2013 (11 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron 900 and E2-2000 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 coresno data2 (Dual-core)
Threadsno data2
Base clock speed2.2 GHzno data
Boost clock speedno data1.75 GHz
L1 cacheno data64K (per core)
L2 cacheno data512K (per core)
L3 cache1 MB L2 Cache0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm40 nm
Die sizeno data75 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °Cno data
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data100 °C
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron 900 and E2-2000 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 configurationno data1
SocketPGA478FT1 BGA 413-Ball
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt18 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron 900 and E2-2000. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-V
PowerNow-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data

Security technologies

Celeron 900 and E2-2000 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 900 and E2-2000 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x-no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron 900 and E2-2000. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesno dataDDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon HD 7340

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 900 0.26
E2-2000 0.31
+19.2%

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 900 412
E2-2000 496
+20.4%

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 900 224
+55.6%
E2-2000 144

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 900 237
E2-2000 270
+13.9%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.26 0.31
Recency 1 January 2009 6 January 2013
Chip lithography 45 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 18 Watt

E2-2000 has a 19.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 years, a 12.5% more advanced lithography process, and 94.4% lower power consumption.

The E2-2000 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron 900 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron 900 and E2-2000, 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 900
Celeron 900
AMD E2-2000
E2-2000

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.


2.4 55 votes

Rate Celeron 900 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.6 56 votes

Rate E2-2000 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron 900 or E2-2000, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.