CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 2330M vs 300

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

Passmark and GeekBench

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

Passmark (Single Core)

Power Consumption

How much power does the processor require?

TDP

Value

Performance Per Dollar

No winner declared

Too close to call

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 Intel Core i3 2330M

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i3 2330M

Report a correction
Is hyperthreaded Yes vs No Somewhat common; Maximizes usage of each CPU core
Higher clock speed 2.2 GHz vs 1.3 GHz Around 70% higher clock speed
Newer manufacturing process 32 nm vs 40 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Better PassMark (Single core) score 1,058 vs 342 More than 3x better PassMark (Single core) score
Higher GPU clock speed 650 MHz vs 488 MHz Around 35% higher GPU clock speed
Significantly more l3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 6x more l3 cache per core
Slightly more l3 cache 3 MB vs 0.5 MB 6x more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
Higher Maximum Operating Temperature 100 °C vs 90 °C More than 10% higher Maximum Operating Temperature
Better PassMark score 2,523 vs 619 More than 4x better PassMark score
Better geekbench (64-bit) score 3,483 vs 882 Around 4x better geekbench (64-bit) score
Slightly better performance per watt 10.49 pt/W vs 6.19 pt/W Around 70% better performance per watt
Front view of AMD E 300

Reasons to consider the
AMD E 300

Report a correction
Lower typical power consumption 14.63W vs 28.44W Around 50% lower typical power consumption
Lower annual home energy cost 4.34 $/year vs 8.43 $/year Around 50% lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 15.77 $/year vs 30.66 $/year Around 50% lower annual commercial energy cost
Newer Aug, 2011 vs Jun, 2011 Release date 2 months later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i3 2330M vs E 300

GeekBench (32-bit)

E 300
827

GeekBench (64-bit)

E 300
882

GeekBench

E 300
1,233

Passmark (Single Core)

E 300
342

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i3 2330M  vs
E 300 
Clock speed 2.2 GHz 1.3 GHz
Cores Dual core Dual core
Is unlocked No No
Is hyperthreaded Yes No

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
MMX
AVX
SSE3
SSE
AMD64
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1333
DDR3-1066
DDR3

details

Core i3 2330M  vs
E 300 
Threads 4 2
L2 cache 1 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
L3 cache 3 MB 0.5 MB
L3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
Manufacture process 32 nm 40 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 22 5
Operating temperature Unknown - 100°C Unknown - 90°C

integrated graphics

GPU GPU GPU
Label Intel® HD Graphics 3000 Radeon™ HD 6310
GPU clock speed 650 MHz 488 MHz

power consumption

TDP 35W 18W
Annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year 4.34 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year 15.77 $/year
Performance per watt 10.49 pt/W 6.19 pt/W
Typical power consumption 28.44W 14.63W
Intel Core i3 2330M
Report a correction
AMD E 300
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus