E2-3000 vs Celeron J4005
Primary details
Comparing Celeron J4005 and E2-3000 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
Place in performance ranking | 2365 | not rated |
Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.39 | no data |
Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
Series | Intel Celeron | AMD E-Series |
Architecture codename | Gemini Lake (2019) | Kabini (2013−2014) |
Release date | 11 December 2017 (6 years ago) | 23 May 2013 (11 years ago) |
Launch price (MSRP) | $107 | no data |
Current price | $425 (4x MSRP) | $202 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Celeron J4005 and E2-3000 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 | 2 (Dual-core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
Threads | 2 | 2 |
Base clock speed | 2 GHz | no data |
Boost clock speed | 2.7 GHz | 1.65 GHz |
L1 cache | 112 KB | 128 KB |
L2 cache | 4 MB | 1 MB |
L3 cache | no data | 0 KB |
Chip lithography | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Die size | no data | 246 mm2 |
Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | no data |
Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 90 °C |
Number of transistors | no data | 1,178 million |
64 bit support | + | + |
Windows 11 compatibility | + | - |
Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Celeron J4005 and E2-3000 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 configuration | 1 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
Socket | BGA1090 | FT3 |
Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron J4005 and E2-3000. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
Instruction set extensions | no data | 86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX, DDR3L-1600 |
AES-NI | + | + |
AVX | no data | + |
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron J4005 and E2-3000 are enumerated here.
AMD-V | no data | + |
VT-d | + | no data |
VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron J4005 and E2-3000. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR3 |
Maximum memory size | 8 GB | no data |
Maximum memory bandwidth | 38.397 GB/s | no data |
ECC memory support | - | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel UHD Graphics 600 | AMD Radeon HD 8280 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron J4005 and E2-3000.
PCI Express lanes | 6 | no 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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Celeron J4005 outperforms E2-3000 by 116% in Passmark.
Pros & cons summary
Integrated graphics card | 0.87 | 0.67 |
Recency | 11 December 2017 | 23 May 2013 |
Chip lithography | 14 nm | 28 nm |
Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 15 Watt |
Celeron J4005 has 29.9% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 4 years, a 100% more advanced lithography process, and 50% lower power consumption.
We couldn't decide between Celeron J4005 and E2-3000. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Celeron J4005 is a desktop processor while E2-3000 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron J4005 and E2-3000, 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.