E-300 vs Celeron G540
E-300
Celeron G540
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 E-300 is positioned at rank 891 and the Celeron G540 is on rank 622, 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 E-300
Performance Per Dollar Celeron G540
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | E-300 | Celeron G540 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) | ✅ More affordable ($10) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Zacate (2011−2013) / 40 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) / 32 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | E-300 | Celeron G540 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ✅ Better overall value (+101%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) | ✅ More affordable ($10) |
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 E-300 and Celeron G540
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.
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.
Processing Power
Both the E-300 and Celeron G540 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.3 GHz on the E-300 versus 2.5 GHz on the Celeron G540 — a 63.2% clock advantage for the Celeron G540. The E-300 uses the Zacate (2011−2013) architecture (40 nm), while the Celeron G540 uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the E-300 scores 1,176 against the Celeron G540's 1,182 — a 0.5% lead for the Celeron G540. L3 cache: 0 kB on the E-300 vs 2 MB (total) on the Celeron G540.
| Feature | E-300 | Celeron G540 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 1.3 GHz | 2.5 GHz+92% |
| Base Clock | — | 2.5 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 2 MB (total) |
| L2 Cache | 512K (per core)+100% | 256 kB (per core) |
| Process | 40 nm | 32 nm-20% |
| Architecture | Zacate (2011−2013) | Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) |
| PassMark | 1,176 | 1,182 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 384 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 655 |
Memory & Platform
The E-300 uses the FT1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron G540 uses LGA1155 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1066 memory speed. The Celeron G540 supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 120% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 1 (E-300) vs 2 (Celeron G540). PCIe lanes: 0 (E-300) vs 16 (Celeron G540) — the Celeron G540 offers 16 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.
| Feature | E-300 | Celeron G540 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FT1 | LGA1155 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1066 | DDR3-1333 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 GB | 32 GB+300% |
| RAM Channels | 1 | 2+100% |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (E-300) vs VT-x (Celeron G540). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 6310 (E-300) and Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) (Celeron G540) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: E-300 targets Budget Mobile, Celeron G540 targets Desktop. Direct competitor: Celeron G540 rivals Pentium G630.
| Feature | E-300 | Celeron G540 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | Yes |
| IGPU Model | Radeon HD 6310 | Intel HD Graphics (Sandy Bridge) |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | VT-x |
| Target Use | Budget Mobile | Desktop |
Value Analysis
The E-300 launched at $60 MSRP, while the Celeron G540 debuted at $42. At current prices ($20 vs $10), the Celeron G540 is $10 cheaper. In terms of value (PassMark points per dollar), the E-300 delivers 58.8 pts/$ vs 118.2 pts/$ for the Celeron G540 — making the Celeron G540 the 67.1% better value option.
| Feature | E-300 | Celeron G540 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $60 | $42-30% |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20 | $10-50% |
| Performance per Dollar | 58.8 | 118.2+101% |
| 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 E-300 and Celeron G540
