Celeron 2.30 vs E-240

Celeron 2.30

1 Cores1 Thrd73 WWMax: 2.3 GHz2003

E-240

1 Cores1 Thrd512 WWMax: 1.5 GHz2011

Performance Spectrum - CPU

Celeron 2.30

1 / 1

325

0.0%

338

+4.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 3955WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

About PassMark

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Value Upgrade Path

This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (PassMark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The Celeron 2.30 is positioned at rank 1092 and the E-240 is on rank 1169, so the Celeron 2.30 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.

MSRP is the manufacturer's suggested retail price.•
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.

Performance Per Dollar Celeron 2.30

Ryzen 9 7950X

MSRP: $194|Avg: $20

95912%

Core i9-10900T

MSRP: $120|Avg: $5

90628%

Ryzen 3 PRO 4355GE

MSRP: $423|Avg: $5

65803%

Ryzen Threadripper 3960X

MSRP: $1399|Avg: $85

19824%

Ryzen 9 9950X

MSRP: $649|Avg: $129

15702%

Ryzen 5 8400F

MSRP: $303|Avg: $55

13737%

Ryzen 7 PRO 2700

MSRP: $299|Avg: $60

7868%

Ryzen 5 2600X

MSRP: $229|Avg: $55

7765%

Ryzen 3 PRO 5350G

MSRP: $150|Avg: $60

7070%

#10

Core Ultra 5 245KF

MSRP: $294|Avg: $189

7070%

#11

Ryzen 5 5500

MSRP: $159|Avg: $85

6990%

#12

Ryzen 5 3600

MSRP: $199|Avg: $80

6802%

#13

Core i3-9100E

MSRP: $202|Avg: $30

6707%

#14

Core Ultra 5 245K

MSRP: $319|Avg: $200

6680%

#15

Core i3-8300T

MSRP: $138|Avg: $25

6619%

#1092

Celeron 2.30

MSRP: $100|Avg: $10

100%

#1093

Phenom X4 9450e

MSRP: $450|Avg: $430

99%

#1094

Athlon 64 X2 3800+

MSRP: $354|Avg: $20

95%

#1095

Athlon 64 3000+

MSRP: $149|Avg: $10

93%

#1096

Athlon XP 3100+

MSRP: $150|Avg: $20

87%

#1097

Athlon 64 3300+

MSRP: $200|Avg: $200

80%

#1098

Athlon 64 2800+

MSRP: $178|Avg: $15

73%

#1099

Athlon 64 3700+

MSRP: $272|Avg: $20

70%

#1100

Athlon 64 FX-72

MSRP: $799|Avg: $40

69%

#1101

Athlon 64 X2 4200+

MSRP: $581|Avg: $110

66%

#1102

Athlon 64 3500+

MSRP: $272|Avg: $10

65%

#1103

Pentium D 830

MSRP: $316|Avg: $20

60%

#1104

Pentium D 960

MSRP: $523|Avg: $15

59%

#1105

Athlon XP 2500+

MSRP: $172|Avg: $15

57%

#1106

Athlon 64 3800+

MSRP: $354|Avg: $10

56%

#1107

Pentium 4 2.53

MSRP: $193|Avg: $13

55%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar E-240

#1157

Atom x5-Z8300

MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A

4340%

#1158

Atom Z3735G

MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A

4277%

#1159

Core i5-480M

MSRP: $81|Avg: $77

3926%

#1160

Core i5-460M

MSRP: $80|Avg: $129

3908%

#1161

Core i5-2540M

MSRP: $266|Avg: $10

3872%

#1163

Core i5-450M

MSRP: $32|Avg: $31

3740%

#1164

Core i3-380M

MSRP: $49|Avg: $25

3586%

#1165

Core i5-430M

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33

3580%

#1166

Core 2 Duo T6600

MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4

3484%

#1169

E-240

MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A

100%

#1170

Celeron 1047UE

MSRP: $100|Avg: $100

100%

#1171

Core M-5Y70

MSRP: $281|Avg: $281

100%

#1172

Celeron U3400

MSRP: $86|Avg: $5

99%

#1173

Celeron T1600

MSRP: $107|Avg: $15

99%

#1174

Pro A12-8800B

MSRP: $400|Avg: $40

99%

#1176

Core i7-2637M

MSRP: $289|Avg: N/A

97%

#1177

Athlon PRO 3045B

MSRP: $426|Avg: $180

96%

#1178

Core 2 Duo SL9600

MSRP: $316|Avg: N/A

96%

#1179

Core 2 Duo T5600

MSRP: $241|Avg: N/A

96%

#1180

Pentium N3510

MSRP: $161|Avg: $161

96%

#1181

Core i7-7Y75

MSRP: $393|Avg: $285

95%

#1183

Core i7-4500U

MSRP: $398|Avg: N/A

93%

Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Generational Difference: This comparison involves processors from different technological eras. The E-240 (2011) utilizes 40 nm technology and **DDR3 Single-channel**, providing a fundamental performance advantage.

Insight	Celeron 2.30	E-240
Gaming	✅ Superior gaming performance	❌ Lower gaming performance
Workstation	❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks	✅ Better multi-core power
Price	⚠️ Higher cost ($10)	✅ More affordable ($0)
Longevity	🛑 Legacy (Northwood (2002−2004) / 130 nm)	🛑 Legacy (Zacate (2011−2013) / 40 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

The Celeron 2.30 (2003) relies on 130 nm technology and DDR1, DDR2, placing it in a different performance category relative to modern standards.

Insight	Celeron 2.30	E-240
Cost Efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency	❌ Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost	⚠️ Higher cost ($10)	✅ More affordable ($0)

Performance Check

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Celeron 2.30 Benchmark Check

E-240 Benchmark Check

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Celeron 2.30 and E-240

Celeron 2.30

The Celeron 2.30 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 2007-01-01. It is based on the Northwood (2002−2004) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 2.3 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 128 kB. Built on 130 nm process technology. Socket: PGA478. Thermal design power (TDP): 73 Watt. Memory support: DDR1, DDR2. Passmark benchmark score: 325 points. Launch price was $69.

E-240

The E-240 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 4 January 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Zacate (2011−2013) architecture. It features 1 cores and 1 threads. Max frequency: 1.5 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 40 nm process technology. Socket: FT1. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB. Memory support: DDR3 Single-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 338 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Celeron 2.30 and E-240 share an identical 1-core/1-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.3 GHz on the Celeron 2.30 versus 1.5 GHz on the E-240 — a 42.1% clock advantage for the Celeron 2.30. The Celeron 2.30 uses the Northwood (2002−2004) architecture (130 nm), while the E-240 uses Zacate (2011−2013) (40 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron 2.30 scores 325 against the E-240's 338 — a 3.9% lead for the E-240. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

Feature	Celeron 2.30	E-240
Cores / Threads	1 / 1	1 / 1
Boost Clock	2.3 GHz+53%	1.5 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	0 kB
L2 Cache	128 kB	512 kB+300%
Process	130 nm	40 nm-69%
Architecture	Northwood (2002−2004)	Zacate (2011−2013)
PassMark	325	338+4%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Celeron 2.30 uses the PGA478 socket (PCIe 1.1), while the E-240 uses FT1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Celeron 2.30	E-240
Socket	PGA478	FT1
PCIe Generation	PCIe 1.1	PCIe 2.0+82%
Max RAM Speed	DDR1-400	—
Max RAM Capacity	4 GB	—
RAM Channels	1	—
ECC Support	❌	—
PCIe Lanes	0	—

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: No (Celeron 2.30) / not specified (E-240). Primary use case: Celeron 2.30 targets Budget. Direct competitor: Celeron 2.30 rivals Pentium 4 2.40.