E-240 vs Phenom II X4 910e
Primary details
Comparing Phenom II X4 910e and E-240 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2141 | not rated |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 1.36 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | AMD E-Series |
| Architecture codename | Deneb (2009−2011) | Zacate (2011−2013) |
| Release date | 25 January 2010 (14 years ago) | 4 January 2011 (13 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $157 | no data |
| Current price | $99 (0.6x MSRP) | $118 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Phenom II X4 910e and E-240 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 cores | 4 (Quad-Core) | 1 (Single-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Base clock speed | 2.6 GHz | no data |
| Boost clock speed | 2.6 GHz | 1.5 GHz |
| L1 cache | 128 KB (per core) | 64 KB |
| L2 cache | 512 KB (per core) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 0 KB |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 40 nm |
| Die size | 258 mm2 | 75 mm2 |
| Number of transistors | 758 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Phenom II X4 910e and E-240 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 configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | AM3 | FT1 BGA 413-Ball |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 18 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Phenom II X4 910e and E-240. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | no data | MMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-V |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Phenom II X4 910e and E-240 are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | no data | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Phenom II X4 910e and E-240. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 Single-channel |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | no data | AMD Radeon HD 6310 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Phenom II X4 910e and E-240.
| PCIe version | 2.0 | no 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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Phenom II X4 910e outperforms E-240 by 993% in Passmark.
Pros & cons summary
| Recency | 25 January 2010 | 4 January 2011 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 1 |
| Threads | 4 | 1 |
| Chip lithography | 45 nm | 40 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 65 Watt | 18 Watt |
We couldn't decide between Phenom II X4 910e and E-240. We've got no test results to judge.
Note that Phenom II X4 910e is a desktop processor while E-240 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Phenom II X4 910e and E-240, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
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.
