E-300 vs Celeron N2830
E-300
Celeron N2830
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 N2830 is on rank 82, so the Celeron N2830 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 N2830
Performance Comparison
About PassMark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
| Insight | E-300 | Celeron N2830 |
|---|---|---|
| Gaming | ❌ Lower gaming performance | ✅ Superior gaming performance |
| Workstation | ❌ Weaker in multi-core tasks | ✅ Better multi-core power |
| Price | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
| Longevity | 🛑 Legacy (Zacate (2011−2013) / 40 nm) | 🛑 Legacy (Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) / 22 nm) |
💎 Value Proposition
| Insight | E-300 | Celeron N2830 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency | ❌ Lower cost efficiency |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️ Higher cost ($20) | ✅ More affordable ($0) |
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 N2830
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 N2830
The Celeron N2830 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 23 February 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 2.16 GHz, with boost up to 2.41 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA1170. Thermal design power (TDP): 7.5 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,185 points. Launch price was $107.
Processing Power
Both the E-300 and Celeron N2830 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 1.3 GHz on the E-300 versus 2.41 GHz on the Celeron N2830 — a 59.8% clock advantage for the Celeron N2830. The E-300 uses the Zacate (2011−2013) architecture (40 nm), while the Celeron N2830 uses Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) (22 nm). In PassMark, the E-300 scores 1,176 against the Celeron N2830's 1,185 — a 0.8% lead for the Celeron N2830. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.
| Feature | E-300 | Celeron N2830 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 2 | 2 / 2 |
| Boost Clock | 1.3 GHz | 2.41 GHz+85% |
| Base Clock | — | 2.16 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 0 kB | 0 kB |
| L2 Cache | 512K (per core) | 512K (per core) |
| Process | 40 nm | 22 nm-45% |
| Architecture | Zacate (2011−2013) | Bay Trail-M (2013−2014) |
| PassMark | 1,176 | 1,185 |
Memory & Platform
The E-300 uses the FT1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Celeron N2830 uses FCBGA1170 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1066 on the E-300 versus 1333 on the Celeron N2830 — the Celeron N2830 supports 199.1% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. Both support up to 8 GB of RAM. Memory channels: 1 (E-300) vs 2 (Celeron N2830). PCIe lanes: 0 (E-300) vs 4 (Celeron N2830) — the Celeron N2830 offers 4 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives.
| Feature | E-300 | Celeron N2830 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | FT1 | FCBGA1170 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 2.0 | PCIe 2.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1066 | 1333+44333% |
| Max RAM Capacity | 8 GB+104857500% | 8 |
| RAM Channels | 1 | 2+100% |
| ECC Support | ❌ | ❌ |
| PCIe Lanes | 0 | 4 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: AMD-V (E-300) vs true (Celeron N2830). Both include integrated graphics — Radeon HD 6310 (E-300) and Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) (Celeron N2830) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: E-300 targets Budget Mobile. Direct competitor: Celeron N2830 rivals AMD A6-6310.
| Feature | E-300 | Celeron N2830 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | Yes |
| IGPU Model | Radeon HD 6310 | Intel HD Graphics (Bay Trail) |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | AMD-V | true |
| Target Use | Budget Mobile | — |
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 N2830
