GX-210JA vs E2-9000
Aggregate performance score
E2-9000 outperforms GX-210JA by a whopping 293% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Contents
Primary details
Comparing processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 3134 | 3623 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Laptop |
| Series | Bristol Ridge | AMD |
| Power efficiency | 2.32 | 0.98 |
| Designer | AMD | AMD |
| Architecture codename | Stoney Ridge (2016−2019) | Temash (2013) |
| Release date | 1 June 2016 (10 years ago) | 23 May 2013 (13 years ago) |
Detailed specifications
Basic parameters of E2-9000 and GX-210JA: 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 |
| Base clock speed | 1.8 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2.2 GHz | 1 GHz |
| L1 cache | no data | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB |
| Chip lithography | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Die size | 124.5 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | 90 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1200 Million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
Compatibility
Information on E2-9000 and GX-210JA 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.
| Socket | BGA | FT3 BGA |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 6 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by E2-9000 and GX-210JA. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Virtualization, | 86x SSE (1, 2, 3, 3S, 4.1, 4.2, 4A),-64, AES, AVX |
| AES-NI | - | + |
| AVX | - | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by E2-9000 and GX-210JA are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | + | - |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by E2-9000 and GX-210JA. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR3 |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | AMD Radeon R2 (Stoney Ridge) ( - 600 MHz) | no data |
Synthetic benchmarks
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.
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. Other than that, Passmark measures multi-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 0.55 | 0.14 |
| Recency | 1 June 2016 | 23 May 2013 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 10 Watt | 6 Watt |
E2-9000 has a 293% higher aggregate performance score, and an age advantage of 3 years.
GX-210JA, on the other hand, has 67% lower power consumption.
The AMD E2-9000 is our recommended choice as it beats the AMD GX-210JA in performance tests.
Other comparisons
We've compiled a selection of CPU comparisons, ranging from closely matched processors to other comparisons that may be of interest.
