Celeron B710 vs E1-1200
Aggregate performance score
E1-1200 outperforms Celeron B710 by a whopping 243% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing E1-1200 and Celeron B710 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3163 | 3389 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | AMD E-Series | Intel Celeron |
| Power efficiency | 1.26 | 0.19 |
| Architecture codename | Zacate (2011−2013) | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) |
| Release date | 6 June 2012 (12 years ago) | 19 June 2011 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | no data | $70 |
Detailed specifications
E1-1200 and Celeron B710 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) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | no data | 1.6 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 1.4 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
| Bus type | no data | DMI 2.0 |
| Bus rate | no data | 4 × 5 GT/s |
| Multiplier | no data | 16 |
| L1 cache | 64K (per core) | 64K (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512K (per core) | 256K (per core) |
| L3 cache | 0 KB | 1.5 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 32 nm |
| Die size | 75 mm2 | 131 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 100 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | no data | 504 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on E1-1200 and Celeron B710 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 | PGA988,PPGA988 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 35 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by E1-1200 and Celeron B710. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | MMX (+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2 |
| FMA | - | + |
| PowerNow | + | - |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | no data | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | no data | - |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | no data | - |
| Idle States | no data | + |
| Thermal Monitoring | - | + |
| Flex Memory Access | no data | + |
| Demand Based Switching | no data | - |
| FDI | no data | + |
| Fast Memory Access | no data | + |
Security technologies
E1-1200 and Celeron B710 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | no data | - |
| EDB | no data | + |
| Anti-Theft | no data | - |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by E1-1200 and Celeron B710 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
| VT-d | no data | - |
| VT-x | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by E1-1200 and Celeron B710. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory size | no data | 16 GB |
| Max memory channels | no data | 2 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | no data | 21.335 GB/s |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | AMD Radeon HD 7310 | Intel HD Graphics for 2nd Generation Intel Processors |
| Graphics max frequency | no data | 1 GHz |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of E1-1200 and Celeron B710 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | no data | 2 |
| eDP | no data | + |
| DisplayPort | - | + |
| HDMI | - | + |
| SDVO | no data | + |
| CRT | no data | + |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by E1-1200 and Celeron B710.
| 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core
Cinebench Release 11.5 Multi Core is a variant of Cinebench R11.5 which uses all the processor threads. A maximum of 64 threads is supported in this version.
WinRAR 4.0
WinRAR 4.0 is an outdated version of a popular file archiver. It contains an internal speed test, using 'Best' setting of RAR compression on large chunks of randomly generated data. Its results are measured in kilobytes per second.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.24 | 0.07 |
| Integrated graphics card | 0.33 | 0.77 |
| Recency | 6 June 2012 | 19 June 2011 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 1 |
| Threads | 2 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 40 nm | 32 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 18 Watt | 35 Watt |
E1-1200 has a 242.9% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 11 months, 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads, and 94.4% lower power consumption.
Celeron B710, on the other hand, has 133.3% faster integrated GPU, and a 25% more advanced lithography process.
The E1-1200 is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron B710 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between E1-1200 and Celeron B710, 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.
