Core i3-N305 vs E1-1200

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Primary details

Comparing E1-1200 and Core i3-N305 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in performance rankingnot rated972
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesAMD E-Seriesno data
Architecture codenameZacate (2011−2013)Alder Lake-N
Release date6 June 2012 (11 years ago)3 January 2023 (1 year ago)
Current price$74 no data

Detailed specifications

E1-1200 and Core i3-N305 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)8 (Octa-Core)
Threads28
Base clock speedno data0.1 GHz
Boost clock speed1.4 GHz3.8 GHz
L1 cache64K (per core)96 KB (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)2 MB (per module)
L3 cache0 KB6 MB (shared)
Chip lithography40 nmIntel 7 nm
Die size75 mm2no data
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Maximum case temperature (TCase)100 °Cno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+
Unlocked multiplierNoNo

Compatibility

Information on E1-1200 and Core i3-N305 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
SocketFT1FCBGA1264
Power consumption (TDP)18 Watt15 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by E1-1200 and Core i3-N305. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsDDR3-1066 RAM (sin. chan.), PCIe 2 [?], MMX (+), SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4AIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NIno data+
FMAno data+
AVXno data+
PowerNow+no data
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data+
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Thermal Monitoringno data+
GPIOno data+
Statusno dataLaunched

Security technologies

E1-1200 and Core i3-N305 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by E1-1200 and Core i3-N305 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+no data
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by E1-1200 and Core i3-N305. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4, DDR5
Maximum memory sizeno data16 GB
Max memory channelsno data1
ECC memory supportno data-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 7310Intel UHD Graphics
Quick Sync Videono data+
Graphics max frequencyno data1.25 GHz
Execution Unitsno data32

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of E1-1200 and Core i3-N305 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by E1-1200 and Core i3-N305 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution supportno data+
Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096 x 2160@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data4096 x 2160@60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by E1-1200 and Core i3-N305 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12.1
OpenGLno data4.6

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by E1-1200 and Core i3-N305.

PCIe versionno data3.0
PCI Express lanesno data9
USB revisionno data2.0/3.2

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.

Benchmark coverage: 68%

E1-1200 379
i3-N305 10100
+2565%

Core i3-N305 outperforms E1-1200 by 2565% in Passmark.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 20%

E1-1200 912
i3-N305 5651
+520%

Core i3-N305 outperforms E1-1200 by 520% in Cinebench 10 32-bit single-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

E1-1200 1682
i3-N305 26169
+1456%

Core i3-N305 outperforms E1-1200 by 1456% in Cinebench 10 32-bit multi-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 19%

E1-1200 874
i3-N305 9081
+940%

Core i3-N305 outperforms E1-1200 by 940% in 3DMark06 CPU.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 18%

E1-1200 76
i3-N305 35.77
+112%

E1-1200 outperforms Core i3-N305 by 112% in wPrime 32.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 17%

E1-1200 1
i3-N305 11
+2038%

Core i3-N305 outperforms E1-1200 by 2038% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit multi-core.

Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core

Cinebench R11.5 is an old benchmark by Maxon, authors of Cinema 4D. It was superseded by later versions of Cinebench, which use more modern variants of Cinema 4D engine. The Single Core version loads a single thread with ray tracing to render a glossy room full of crystal spheres and light sources.

Benchmark coverage: 14%

E1-1200 0.27
i3-N305 2.05
+659%

Core i3-N305 outperforms E1-1200 by 659% in Cinebench 11.5 64-bit single-core.

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.

Benchmark coverage: 13%

E1-1200 418
i3-N305 3377
+709%

Core i3-N305 outperforms E1-1200 by 709% in WinRAR 4.0.

Pros & cons summary


Recency 6 June 2012 3 January 2023
Physical cores 2 8
Threads 2 8
Power consumption (TDP) 18 Watt 15 Watt

We couldn't decide between E1-1200 and Core i3-N305. We've got no test results to judge.


Should you still have questions on choice between E1-1200 and Core i3-N305, 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 E1-1200
E1-1200
Intel Core i3-N305
Core i3-N305

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.


2.3 260 votes

Rate E1-1200 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.6 465 votes

Rate Core i3-N305 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about E1-1200 or Core i3-N305, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.