CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 2330M vs 300


Benchmark performance using all cores

Passmark, GeekBench (32-bit) and GeekBench (64-bit)

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

Passmark (Single Core)

Power Consumption

How much power does the processor require?



How does CPUBoss rank the features of each product?

Features and specifications that differ between products

CPUBoss Score

Performance, Single-core Performance, Power Consumption and Features

Intel Core i3 2330M 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i3 2330M  based on its .

See full details

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!

Intel Core i3 2330M

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Core i3 2330M

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
Significantly higher clock speed 2.2 GHz vs 1.3 GHz Around 70% higher clock speed
Is hyperthreaded Yes vs No Somewhat common; Maximizes usage of each CPU core
Significantly 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
Newer manufacturing process 32 nms vs 40 nms A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
More threads 4 vs 2 Twice as many threads
Much more l3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 6x more l3 cache per core
Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score 1,067 vs 342 More than 3x better PassMark (Single core) score
Better PassMark score 2,544 vs 621 More than 4x better PassMark score
Significantly higher Maximum Operating Temperature 100 °C vs 90 °C More than 10% higher Maximum Operating Temperature
Better geekbench (64-bit) score 3,483 vs 882 Around 4x better geekbench (64-bit) score
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
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

GeekBench (64-bit)

E 300


E 300

Passmark (Single Core)

E 300

Specifications Full list of technical specs


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


Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 35W 18W
Annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year 4.34 $/year
Performance per watt 10.62 pt/W 6.27 pt/W
Typical power consumption 28.44W 14.63W


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 nms 40 nms
Max CPUs 1 1
Operating temperature Unknown - 100°C Unknown - 90°C


Label Intel® HD Graphics 3000 Radeon™ HD 6310
Intel Core i3 2330M
Report a correction
AMD E 300
Report a correction


comments powered by Disqus