Ultra 7 265KF vs E2-6110

VS

Aggregate performance score

E2-6110
2014
4 cores / 4 threads, 15 Watt
0.71
Core Ultra 7 265KF
2024
20 cores / 20 threads, 125 Watt
39.01
+5394%

Core Ultra 7 265KF outperforms E2-6110 by a whopping 5394% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing E2-6110 and Core Ultra 7 265KF processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking269673
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data100.00
Market segmentLaptopDesktop processor
SeriesAMD E-Seriesno data
Power efficiency4.4829.53
Architecture codenameBeema (2014)Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)
Release date29 April 2014 (10 years ago)24 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$379

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

E2-6110 and Core Ultra 7 265KF 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 cores4 (Quad-Core)20 (Icosa-Core)
Threads420
Base clock speedno data3.9 GHz
Boost clock speed1.5 GHz5.5 GHz
L1 cacheno data112 KB (per core)
L2 cache2048 KB3 MB (per core)
L3 cacheno data30 MB (shared)
Chip lithography28 nm3 nm
Die sizeno data243 mm2
Number of transistorsno data17,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier-+

Compatibility

Information on E2-6110 and Core Ultra 7 265KF 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 configurationno data1
SocketFT3b1851
Power consumption (TDP)15 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by E2-6110 and Core Ultra 7 265KF. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensions86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVXno data
AES-NI++
FMAFMA4-
AVX++
PowerNow+-
PowerGating+-
VirusProtect+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
TSX-+

Security technologies

E2-6110 and Core Ultra 7 265KF technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by E2-6110 and Core Ultra 7 265KF are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+
IOMMU 2.0+-

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by E2-6110 and Core Ultra 7 265KF. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3-1600DDR5
Max memory channels1no data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardAMD Radeon R2 GraphicsN/A
Enduro+-
Switchable graphics+-
UVD+-
VCE+-

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of E2-6110 and Core Ultra 7 265KF integrated GPUs.

DisplayPort+-
HDMI+-

Graphics API support

APIs supported by E2-6110 and Core Ultra 7 265KF integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.

DirectXDirectX® 12no data
Vulkan+-

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by E2-6110 and Core Ultra 7 265KF.

PCIe version2.05.0
PCI Express lanesno data20

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.

E2-6110 0.71
Ultra 7 265KF 39.01
+5394%

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.

E2-6110 1128
Ultra 7 265KF 61964
+5393%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.71 39.01
Recency 29 April 2014 24 October 2024
Physical cores 4 20
Threads 4 20
Chip lithography 28 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 15 Watt 125 Watt

E2-6110 has 733.3% lower power consumption.

Ultra 7 265KF, on the other hand, has a 5394.4% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 10 years, 400% more physical cores and 400% more threads, and a 833.3% more advanced lithography process.

The Core Ultra 7 265KF is our recommended choice as it beats the E2-6110 in performance tests.

Be aware that E2-6110 is a notebook processor while Core Ultra 7 265KF is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between E2-6110 and Core Ultra 7 265KF, 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 E2-6110
E2-6110
Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF
Core Ultra 7 265KF

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.


3 135 votes

Rate E2-6110 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.5 24 votes

Rate Core Ultra 7 265KF on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about E2-6110 or Core Ultra 7 265KF, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.