E2-3000M vs FX-4300

VS

Primary details

Comparing FX-4300 and E2-3000M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking1970not rated
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation0.27no data
Market segmentDesktop processorLaptop
Seriesno dataAMD E-Series
Power efficiency1.87no data
Architecture codenameVishera (2012−2015)Llano (2011−2012)
Release date23 October 2012 (12 years ago)20 December 2011 (12 years ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$122no data

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

FX-4300 and E2-3000M 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)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed3.8 GHz1.8 GHz
Boost clock speed4 GHz2.4 GHz
L1 cacheno data128 KB (per core)
L2 cache4096 KB512K (per core)
L3 cacheno data0 KB
Chip lithography32 nm32 nm
Die size315 mm2228 mm2
Maximum core temperature71 °Cno data
Number of transistors1,200 million1,178 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--
Unlocked multiplier+-
P0 Vcore voltageMin: 1.225 V - Max: 1.3875 Vno data

Compatibility

Information on FX-4300 and E2-3000M 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
SocketAM3+FS1
Power consumption (TDP)95 Watt35 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by FX-4300 and E2-3000M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataSSE4.1/2, 3DNow, Radeon HD 6380G
AES-NI+-
FMA+-
AVX+-

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by FX-4300 and E2-3000M are enumerated here.

AMD-V++

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by FX-4300 and E2-3000M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3DDR3

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardOn certain motherboards (Chipset feature)AMD Radeon HD 6380G

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by FX-4300 and E2-3000M.

PCIe versionn/ano 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.

FX-4300 2985
+347%
E2-3000M 668

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.

FX-4300 453
+96.1%
E2-3000M 231

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.

FX-4300 1103
+159%
E2-3000M 426

Pros & cons summary


Recency 23 October 2012 20 December 2011
Physical cores 4 2
Threads 4 2
Power consumption (TDP) 95 Watt 35 Watt

FX-4300 has an age advantage of 10 months, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.

E2-3000M, on the other hand, has 171.4% lower power consumption.

We couldn't decide between FX-4300 and E2-3000M. We've got no test results to judge.

Note that FX-4300 is a desktop processor while E2-3000M is a notebook one.


Should you still have questions on choice between FX-4300 and E2-3000M, 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 FX-4300
FX-4300
AMD E2-3000M
E2-3000M

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.


3.8 1723 votes

Rate FX-4300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.9 54 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about FX-4300 or E2-3000M, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.