E2-9010 vs Celeron M U3400

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing Celeron M U3400 and E2-9010 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance rankingnot rated2679
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Celeron MAMD Bristol Ridge
Architecture codenameArrandale (2010−2011)Stoney Ridge (2016−2019)
Release date24 May 2010 (14 years ago)1 June 2016 (8 years ago)

Detailed specifications

Celeron M U3400 and E2-9010 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 speedno data2 GHz
Boost clock speed1.06 GHz2.2 GHz
Bus rate2500 MHzno data
L2 cache512 KB2048 KB
L3 cache2 MBno data
Chip lithography32 nm28 nm
Die size81+114 mm2124.5 mm2
Maximum core temperature105 °C90 °C
Number of transistors382+177 Million1200 Million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Celeron M U3400 and E2-9010 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.

SocketBGA1288FP4
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt10-15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron M U3400 and E2-9010. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataVirtualization,
AES-NI-+
FMA-FMA4
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)+no data
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data

Security technologies

Celeron M U3400 and E2-9010 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 E2-9010 are enumerated here.

AMD-V-+
VT-x+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron M U3400 and E2-9010. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4-1866
Max memory channelsno data1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataAMD Radeon R2 Graphics
iGPU core countno data2
Enduro-+
Switchable graphics-+
UVD-+
VCE-+

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Celeron M U3400 and E2-9010 integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+

Graphics API support

APIs supported by Celeron M U3400 and E2-9010 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno dataDirectX® 12
Vulkan-+

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron M U3400 and E2-9010.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data8

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.

Celeron M U3400 1205
E2-9010 1871
+55.3%

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 M U3400 2317
E2-9010 3268
+41%

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.

Celeron M U3400 62.2
E2-9010 37.14
+67.5%

Pros & cons summary


Recency 24 May 2010 1 June 2016
Chip lithography 32 nm 28 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 10 Watt

E2-9010 has an age advantage of 6 years, a 14.3% more advanced lithography process, and 80% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between Celeron M U3400 and E2-9010. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron M U3400 and E2-9010, 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 E2-9010
E2-9010

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
2.5 28 votes

Rate E2-9010 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 E2-9010, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.