E-300 vs Celeron G1620

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron G1620 and E-300 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking2464not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.03no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD E-Series
Power efficiency1.69no data
Architecture codenameIvy Bridge (2012−2013)Zacate (2011−2013)
Release date3 December 2012 (11 years ago)22 August 2011 (13 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$208no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron G1620 and E-300 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 speed2.7 GHzno data
Boost clock speed2.7 GHz1.3 GHz
Bus rate5 GT/sno data
L1 cache64 KB (per core)64K (per core)
L2 cache256 KB (per core)512K (per core)
L3 cache2 MB (shared)0 KB
Chip lithography22 nm40 nm
Die size94 mm275 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)65 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron G1620 and E-300 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 configuration11
SocketFCLGA1155FT1
Power consumption (TDP)55 Watt18 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron G1620 and E-300. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SVM
AVX+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
My WiFi-no data
Turbo Boost Technology-no data
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-

Security technologies

Celeron G1620 and E-300 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-no data
EDB+no data
Secure Key-no data
Anti-Theft-no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron G1620 and E-300 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-d-no data
VT-x+no data
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron G1620 and E-300. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3
Maximum memory size32 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth21 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel® HD Graphics for 3rd Generation Intel® ProcessorsAMD Radeon HD 6310
Graphics max frequency1.05 GHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron G1620 and E-300 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported3no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron G1620 and E-300.

PCIe version2.0no 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.



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 G1620 1560
+360%
E-300 339

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 G1620 415
+372%
E-300 88

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 G1620 725
+377%
E-300 152

Pros & cons summary


Recency 3 December 2012 22 August 2011
Chip lithography 22 nm 40 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 55 Watt 18 Watt

Celeron G1620 has an age advantage of 1 year, and a 81.8% more advanced lithography process.

E-300, on the other hand, has 205.6% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron G1620 and E-300. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that Celeron G1620 is a desktop processor while E-300 is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron G1620 and E-300, 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 G1620
Celeron G1620
AMD E-300
E-300

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.


3.4 84 votes

Rate Celeron G1620 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.4 288 votes

Rate E-300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron G1620 or E-300, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.