Celeron U3400 vs E-450
Primary details
Comparing E-450 and Celeron U3400 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | not rated | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD E-Series | Intel Celeron |
| Architecture codename | Zacate (2010−2013) | Westmere (2010−2011) |
| Release date | 22 August 2011 (13 years ago) | 24 May 2010 (14 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
E-450 and Celeron U3400 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 |
| Boost clock speed | 1.65 GHz | 0.07 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 1.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 1 × 2.5 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 8 |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 2 MB |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 75 mm2 | 81 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | no data | 382 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on E-450 and Celeron U3400 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 | no data |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 18 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by E-450 and Celeron U3400. 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 |
| FMA | - | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by E-450 and Celeron U3400 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by E-450 and Celeron U3400. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 Single-channel | DDR3-800 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 8 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 12.799 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon HD 6320 | Intel HD Graphics |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by E-450 and Celeron U3400.
| PCIe version | no data | 2.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
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.
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
| Recency | 22 August 2011 | 24 May 2010 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 32 nm |
E-450 has an age advantage of 1 year.
Celeron U3400, on the other hand, has a 25% more advanced lithography process.
We couldn't decide between E-450 and Celeron U3400. We've got no test results to judge.
Should you still have questions on choice between E-450 and Celeron U3400, 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.
