E-350 vs Celeron Dual-Core SU2300

VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron Dual-Core SU2300
2009
2 cores / 2 threads, 10 Watt
0.30
+11.1%

Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 outperforms E-350 by a moderate 11% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 and E-350 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31113147
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron Dual-CoreAMD E-Series
Power efficiency2.821.41
Architecture codenamePenryn (2008−2011)Zacate (2011−2013)
Release date1 September 2009 (15 years ago)4 January 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$134no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 and E-350 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 speed1.2 GHz1.6 GHz
Bus rate800 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data64K (per core)
L2 cache1 MB512K (per core)
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography45 nm40 nm
Die size107 mm275 mm2
Maximum core temperature100 °C90 °C
Number of transistors410 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 and E-350 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
SocketBGA956FT1
Power consumption (TDP)10 Watt18 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 and E-350. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX (+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 and E-350 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 and E-350. 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 6310

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 Dual-Core SU2300 0.30
+11.1%
E-350 0.27

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 Dual-Core SU2300 482
+14.2%
E-350 422

Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core

Cinebench R10 is an ancient ray tracing benchmark for processors by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. Its single core version uses just one CPU thread to render a futuristic looking motorcycle.

Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 1250
+19.2%
E-350 1049

Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core

Cinebench Release 10 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R10 using all the processor threads. Possible number of threads is limited by 16 in this version.

Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 2380
+18.7%
E-350 2005

3DMark06 CPU

3DMark06 is a discontinued DirectX 9 benchmark suite from Futuremark. Its CPU part contains two scenarios, one dedicated to artificial intelligence pathfinding, another to game physics using PhysX package.

Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 1000
E-350 1021
+2.1%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.30 0.27
Recency 1 September 2009 4 January 2011
Chip lithography 45 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 10 Watt 18 Watt

Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 has a 11.1% higher aggregate performance score, and 80% lower power consumption.

E-350, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, and a 12.5% more advanced lithography process.

The Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 is our recommended choice as it beats the E-350 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 and E-350, 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 Dual-Core SU2300
Celeron Dual-Core SU2300
AMD E-350
E-350

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.


3.3 7 votes

Rate Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 396 votes

Rate E-350 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron Dual-Core SU2300 or E-350, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.