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

Intel Celeron M 723

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Celeron M 723

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Celeron M 723

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron M 723

Report a correction
Much better 3DMark06 CPU score 555 vs 24 Around 23.2x better 3DMark06 CPU score
Significantly lower typical power consumption 8.13W vs 30.2W 3.7x lower typical power consumption
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Significantly better performance per watt 4.41 pt/W vs 1.5 pt/W Around 3x better performance per watt
Much lower annual home energy cost 2.41 $/year vs 12 $/year 5x lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 8.76 $/year vs 28.21 $/year 3.2x lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of AMD E 350

Reasons to consider the
AMD E 350

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Higher clock speed 1.6 GHz vs 1.2 GHz Around 35% higher clock speed
Has virtualization support Yes vs No Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.5 GHz vs 1 GHz 3.5x better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Newer manufacturing process 40 nm vs 45 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Significantly better geekbench 3 AES single core score 51,600 MB/s vs 49,650 MB/s Around 5% better geekbench 3 AES single core score
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.5 GHz vs 1 GHz 3.5x better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Newer Jan, 2011 vs Aug, 2008 Release date over 2 years later
More cores 2 vs 1 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Slightly better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score 1,096 vs 658 More than 65% better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron M 723 vs E 350

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

E 350
1,096

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Celeron M 723
49,650 MB/s
E 350
51,600 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

E 350
1,032

GeekBench

E 350
1,861

3D Mark 06 (CPU)

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron M 723  vs
E 350 
Clock speed 1.2 GHz 1.6 GHz
Cores Single core Dual core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support No Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
MMX
SSE3
SSE
AMD64
SSE4.1
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 10W 18W
Annual home energy cost 2.41 $/year 12 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 8.76 $/year 28.21 $/year
Performance per watt 4.41 pt/W 1.5 pt/W
Typical power consumption 8.13W 30.2W

details

Celeron M 723  vs
E 350 
Threads 1 2
L2 cache 1 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nm 40 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 10 8
Voltage range 1.05 - 1.15V 1.25 - 1.35V

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 1 GHz 3.5 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1 GHz 3.5 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 1 GHz 3.5 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None GPU
Label N/A Radeon™ HD 6310
Latest DirectX N/A 11.0
GPU clock speed N/A 492 MHz

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Intel Celeron M 723
Report a correction
AMD E 350
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus