Celeron G540 vs E-300
Celeron G540
E-300
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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 G540 is positioned at rank 622 and the E-300 is on rank 891, so the Celeron G540 offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar Celeron G540
Performance Per Dollar E-300
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | Celeron G540 | E-300 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ✅ Superior gaming performance | ❌ Lower gaming performance |
| Workstation | ✅ Better multi-core power | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks |
| Price | ✅ More affordable ($10) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) / 32 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Zacate (2011−2013) / 40 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | Celeron G540 | E-300 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+101%) | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ✅ More affordable ($10) | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) |
Performance Check
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.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Celeron G540 and E-300
Celeron G540
The Celeron G540 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 4 September 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.5 GHz, with boost up to 2.5 GHz. L3 cache: 2 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,182 points. Launch price was $158.
E-300
The E-300 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 22 August 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Zacate (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 1.3 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 40 nm process technology. Socket: FT1. Thermal design power (TDP): 18 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,176 points. Launch price was $69.
Processing Power
Both the Celeron G540 and E-300 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.5 GHz on the Celeron G540 versus 1.3 GHz on the E-300 — a 63.2% clock advantage for the Celeron G540. The Celeron G540 uses the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture (32 nm), while the E-300 uses Zacate (2011−2013) (40 nm). In PassMark, the Celeron G540 scores 1,182 against the E-300's 1,176 — a 0.5% lead for the Celeron G540. L3 cache: 2 MB (total) on the Celeron G540 vs 0 kB on the E-300.
| Feature | Celeron G540 | E-300 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 2.5 GHz+92% | 1.3 GHz |
| Base Clock | 2.5 GHz | — |
| L3 Cache | 2 MB (total) | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 256 kB (per core) | 512K (per core)+100% |
| Process | 32 nm-20% | 40 nm |
| Architecture | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) | Zacate (2011−2013) |
| PassMark | 1,182 | 1,176 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | 384 | — |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | 655 | — |
Memory & Platform
The Celeron G540 uses the LGA1155 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the E-300 uses FT1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1333 memory speed. The Celeron G540 supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Celeron G540) vs 1 (E-300). PCIe lanes: 16 (Celeron G540) vs 0 (E-300) — the Celeron G540 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.
| Feature | Celeron G540 | E-300 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1155 | FT1 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1333 | DDR3-1066 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 32 GB+300% | 8 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2+100% | 1 |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 0 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x (Celeron G540) vs AMD-V (E-300). Both include integrated graphics — Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (Celeron G540) and Radeon HD 6310 (E-300) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Celeron G540 targets Desktop, E-300 targets Budget Mobile. Direct competitor: Celeron G540 rivals Pentium G630.
| Feature | Celeron G540 | E-300 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | Yes |
| IGPU Model | Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) | Radeon HD 6310 |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x | AMD-V |
| Target Use | Desktop | Budget Mobile |
Value Analysis
The Celeron G540 launched at $42 MSRP, while the E-300 debuted at $60. At current prices ($10 vs $20), the Celeron G540 is $10 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the Celeron G540 delivers 118.2 pts/$ vs 58.8 pts/$ for the E-300 — making the Celeron G540 the 67.1% better value option.
| Feature | Celeron G540 | E-300 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $42-30% | $60 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $10-50% | $20 |
| Performance per Dollar | 118.2+101% | 58.8 |
| Release Date | 2011 | 2011 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Celeron G540 and E-300
