Celeron J4025 vs E2-3000M

VS

Primary details

Comparing E2-3000M and Celeron J4025 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the rankingnot rated2511
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data2.57
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD E-Seriesno data
Power efficiencyno data8.80
Architecture codenameLlano (2011−2012)Gemini Lake Refresh (2019)
Release date20 December 2011 (12 years ago)4 November 2019 (5 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$107

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

E2-3000M and Celeron J4025 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads22
Base clock speed1.8 GHz2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.4 GHz2.9 GHz
L1 cache128 KB (per core)56 KB (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)4 MB (shared)
L3 cache0 KB4 MB
Chip lithography32 nm14 nm
Die size228 mm293 mm2
Maximum core temperatureno data105 °C
Number of transistors1,178 millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-+

Compatibility

Information on E2-3000M and Celeron J4025 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
SocketFS1FCBGA1090
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt10 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by E2-3000M and Celeron J4025. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsSSE4.1/2, 3DNow, Radeon HD 6380GIntel® SSE4.2
AES-NI-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
Speed Shiftno data-
Turbo Boost Technologyno data-
Hyper-Threading Technologyno data-
Idle Statesno data+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Smart Responseno data-
GPIOno data+
Turbo Boost Max 3.0no data-

Security technologies

E2-3000M and Celeron J4025 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

EDBno data+
Secure Keyno data+
MPX-+
Identity Protection-+
SGXno dataYes with Intel® ME
OS Guardno data+
Anti-Theftno data-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by E2-3000M and Celeron J4025 are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by E2-3000M and Celeron J4025. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR4
Maximum memory sizeno data8 GB
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics card
Compare
AMD Radeon HD 6380GIntel UHD Graphics 600
Max video memoryno data8 GB
Quick Sync Video-+
Graphics max frequencyno data700 MHz
Execution Unitsno data12

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of E2-3000M and Celeron J4025 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supportedno data3
eDPno data+
DisplayPort-+
HDMI-+
MIPI-DSIno data+

Graphics image quality

Maximum display resolutions supported by E2-3000M and Celeron J4025 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.

4K resolution supportno data+
Max resolution over HDMI 1.4no data4096x2160@30Hz
Max resolution over eDPno data4096x2160@60Hz
Max resolution over DisplayPortno data4096x2160@60Hz

Graphics API support

APIs supported by E2-3000M and Celeron J4025 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXno data12
OpenGLno data4.4

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by E2-3000M and Celeron J4025.

PCIe versionno data2.0
PCI Express lanesno data6
USB revisionno data2.0/3.0
Total number of SATA portsno data2
Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Portsno data2
Number of USB portsno data8
Integrated LANno data-
UARTno 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.



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.

E2-3000M 668
Celeron J4025 1473
+121%

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.

E2-3000M 231
Celeron J4025 332
+43.7%

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.

E2-3000M 426
Celeron J4025 540
+26.8%

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.

E2-3000M 1597
Celeron J4025 2337
+46.3%

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.

E2-3000M 3014
Celeron J4025 4556
+51.2%

Pros & cons summary


Integrated graphics card 0.52 0.87
Recency 20 December 2011 4 November 2019
Chip lithography 32 nm 14 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 10 Watt

Celeron J4025 has 67.3% faster integrated GPU, an age advantage of 7 years, a 128.6% more advanced lithography process, and 250% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between E2-3000M and Celeron J4025. We've got no test results to judge.

Be aware that E2-3000M is a notebook processor while Celeron J4025 is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between E2-3000M and Celeron J4025, 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 E2-3000M
E2-3000M
Intel Celeron J4025
Celeron J4025

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.


2.9 54 votes

Rate E2-3000M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.2 125 votes

Rate Celeron J4025 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about E2-3000M or Celeron J4025, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.