Ryzen 7 3800X vs E-240
Aggregate performance score
Ryzen 7 3800X outperforms E-240 by a whopping 11892% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3474 | 549 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 15.35 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Desktop processor |
| Series | AMD E-Series | AMD Ryzen 7 |
| Power efficiency | 0.64 | 13.15 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Manufacturer | no data | TSMC |
| Architecture codename | Zacate (2011−2013) | Matisse (2019−2020) |
| Release date | 4 January 2011 (14 years ago) | 7 July 2019 (5 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $399 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Performance to price scatter graph
Detailed specifications
E-240 and Ryzen 7 3800X 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 | 1 (Single-Core) | 8 (Octa-Core) |
| Threads | 1 | 16 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 3.9 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.5 GHz | 4.5 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB | 96K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 512K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 32 MB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 7 nm, 12 nm |
| Die size | 75 mm2 | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 19,200 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on E-240 and Ryzen 7 3800X 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 | 1 (Uniprocessor) |
| Socket | FT1 BGA 413-Ball | AM4 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 105 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by E-240 and Ryzen 7 3800X. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-V | no data |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by E-240 and Ryzen 7 3800X are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by E-240 and Ryzen 7 3800X. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 Single-channel | DDR4 Dual-channel |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 128 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 51.196 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD 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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
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.
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.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.12 | 14.39 |
| Recency | 4 January 2011 | 7 July 2019 |
| Physical cores | 1 | 8 |
| Threads | 1 | 16 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 7 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 105 Watt |
E-240 has 483.3% lower power consumption.
Ryzen 7 3800X, on the other hand, has a 11891.7% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 8 years, 700% more physical cores and 1500% more threads, and a 471.4% more advanced lithography process.
The AMD Ryzen 7 3800X is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD E-240 in performance tests.
Be aware that E-240 is a notebook processor while Ryzen 7 3800X is a desktop one.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
