Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of AMD E 300

Reasons to consider the
AMD E 300

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 40 nm vs 130 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
More l2 cache 1 MB vs 0.5 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Has a NX bit Yes vs No Somewhat common; Prevents a common class of security exploits
More cores 2 vs 1 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Front view of AMD Athlon XP 3000+

Reasons to consider the
AMD Athlon XP 3000+

Report a correction
Significantly higher clock speed 2.1 GHz vs 1.3 GHz More than 60% higher clock speed
Better PassMark (Single core) score 561 vs 342 Around 65% better PassMark (Single core) score

Benchmarks Real world tests of E 300 vs Athlon XP 3000+

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

E 300  vs
Athlon XP 3000+ 
Clock speed 1.3 GHz 2.1 GHz
Cores Dual core Single core

features

Has a NX bit Yes No
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
MMX
SSE3
SSE
AMD64
AMD-V
3DNow!
Supplemental SSE3

details

E 300  vs
Athlon XP 3000+ 
Threads 2 1
L2 cache 1 MB 0.5 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 40 nm 130 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

power consumption

Typical power consumption 14.63W N/A
AMD E 300
Report a correction
AMD Athlon XP 3000+
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus