Solo T1400 vs E-300

VS

Aggregate performance score

E-300
2011
2 cores / 2 threads, 18 Watt
0.21
+31.3%
Core Solo T1400
2006
1 core / 1 thread, 27 Watt
0.16

E-300 outperforms Core Solo T1400 by a substantial 31% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing E-300 and Core Solo T1400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking31993284
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD E-SeriesCore Solo
Power efficiency1.100.56
Architecture codenameZacate (2011−2013)Yonah (2005−2006)
Release date22 August 2011 (13 years ago)January 2006 (18 years ago)

Detailed specifications

E-300 and Core Solo T1400 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)1 (Single-Core)
Threads21
Base clock speedno data1.83 GHz
Boost clock speed1.3 GHz1.83 GHz
Bus rateno data667 MHz
L1 cache64K (per core)64 KB
L2 cache512K (per core)2 MB
L3 cache0 KB0 KB
Chip lithography40 nm65 nm
Die size75 mm290 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data100 °C
Number of transistorsno data151 million
64 bit support+-
Windows 11 compatibility--
VID voltage rangeno data1.1625V - 1.3V

Compatibility

Information on E-300 and Core Solo T1400 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
SocketFT1PPGA478, PBGA479
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt27 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by E-300 and Core Solo T1400. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsMMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SVMno data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data-
Demand Based Switchingno data-
PAEno data32 Bit
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

E-300 and Core Solo T1400 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data-
EDBno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by E-300 and Core Solo T1400 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-xno data-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by E-300 and Core Solo T1400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR1

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon HD 6310no 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.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

E-300 0.21
+31.3%
Solo T1400 0.16

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.

E-300 339
+34%
Solo T1400 253

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.

E-300 79
+20.3%
Solo T1400 95

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.21 0.16
Physical cores 2 1
Threads 2 1
Chip lithography 40 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 27 Watt

E-300 has a 31.3% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, a 62.5% more advanced lithography process, and 50% lower power consumption.

The E-300 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core Solo T1400 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between E-300 and Core Solo T1400, 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.


AMD E-300
E-300
Intel Core Solo T1400
Core Solo T1400

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.


2.4 303 votes

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

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

Rate Core Solo T1400 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about E-300 or Core Solo T1400, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.