E2-1800 vs Celeron M U3400

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M U3400 and E2-1800 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance rankingnot ratednot rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesIntel Celeron MAMD E-Series
Architecture codenameArrandale (2010−2011)Zacate (2011−2013)
Release date24 May 2010 (14 years ago)6 June 2012 (12 years ago)
Current priceno data$95

Detailed specifications

Celeron M U3400 and E2-1800 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 speed1.06 GHz1.7 GHz
Bus support2500 MHzno data
L1 cacheno data64K (per core)
L2 cache512 KB512K (per core)
L3 cache2 MB0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm40 nm
Die size81+114 mm275 mm2
Maximum case temperature (TCase)no data100 °C
Number of transistors382+177 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M U3400 and E2-1800 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
SocketBGA1288FT1 BGA 413-Ball
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt18 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M U3400 and E2-1800. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataMMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-V
PowerNowno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+no data
Flex Memory Access+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data

Security technologies

Celeron M U3400 and E2-1800 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDB+no data

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron M U3400 and E2-1800 are enumerated here.

AMD-Vno data+
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M U3400 and E2-1800. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3

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.


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.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

Celeron M U3400 1205
+8.6%
E2-1800 1110

Celeron M U3400 outperforms E2-1800 by 9% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Celeron M U3400 2317
+9.2%
E2-1800 2121

Celeron M U3400 outperforms E2-1800 by 9% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

Celeron M U3400 988
E2-1800 1083
+9.6%

E2-1800 outperforms Celeron M U3400 by 10% in 3DMark06 CPU.

wPrime 32

wPrime 32M is a math multi-thread processor test, which calculates square roots of first 32 million integer numbers. Its result is measured in seconds, so that the less is benchmark result, the faster the processor.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

Celeron M U3400 62.2
+11%
E2-1800 69.05

E2-1800 outperforms Celeron M U3400 by 11% in wPrime 32.

Pros & cons summary


Recency 24 May 2010 6 June 2012
Chip lithography 32 nm 40 nm

We couldn't decide between Celeron M U3400 and E2-1800. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that Celeron M U3400 is a notebook processor while E2-1800 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M U3400 and E2-1800, 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 M U3400
Celeron M U3400
AMD E2-1800
E2-1800

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.


2.8 4 votes

Rate Celeron M U3400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.8 159 votes

Rate E2-1800 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron M U3400 or E2-1800, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.