E2-3000M
VS
Athlon X2 QL-64

E2-3000M vs Athlon X2 QL-64

AMD

E2-3000M

2 Cores2 Thrd35 WWMax: 2.4 GHz2011
VS
AMD

Athlon X2 QL-64

2 Cores2 Thrd1 WWMax: 2.1 GHz2009

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 E2-3000M is positioned at rank 766 and the Athlon X2 QL-64 is on rank 665, so the Athlon X2 QL-64 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 E2-3000M

#754
Atom x5-Z8300
MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A
1102%
#755
Atom Z3735G
MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A
1086%
#756
Core i5-480M
MSRP: $81|Avg: $77
997%
#757
Core i5-460M
MSRP: $80|Avg: $129
992%
#758
Core i5-2540M
MSRP: $266|Avg: $10
983%
#760
Core i5-450M
MSRP: $32|Avg: $31
950%
#761
Core i3-380M
MSRP: $49|Avg: $25
911%
#762
Core i5-430M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33
909%
#763
Core 2 Duo T6600
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4
885%
#766
E2-3000M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: N/A
100%
#767
Core i7-1250U
MSRP: $426|Avg: N/A
100%
#772
Core i7-9750HF
MSRP: $395|Avg: $395
99%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Per Dollar Athlon X2 QL-64

#653
Atom x5-Z8300
MSRP: $20|Avg: N/A
909%
#654
Atom Z3735G
MSRP: $17|Avg: N/A
896%
#655
Core i5-480M
MSRP: $81|Avg: $77
822%
#656
Core i5-460M
MSRP: $80|Avg: $129
818%
#657
Core i5-2540M
MSRP: $266|Avg: $10
811%
#659
Core i5-450M
MSRP: $32|Avg: $31
783%
#660
Core i3-380M
MSRP: $49|Avg: $25
751%
#661
Core i5-430M
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $33
750%
#662
Core 2 Duo T6600
MSRP: N/A|Avg: $4
730%
#665
Athlon X2 QL-64
MSRP: $50|Avg: $15
100%
#666
Core 3 N350
MSRP: $225|Avg: $220
100%
#668
FX-7500
MSRP: $100|Avg: $25
99%
Based on actual market prices and performance synthetic scores.

Performance Comparison

About PassMark

🏆 Chipversus Verdict

🚀 Performance Leadership

Performance Trade-off: The E2-3000M leads in gaming performance. However, the Athlon X2 QL-64 is the stronger candidate for professional workloads, offering 1.1% greater multi-core processing power.
InsightE2-3000MAthlon X2 QL-64
Gaming
Superior gaming performance
Lower gaming performance
Workstation
Weaker in multi-core tasks
Better multi-core power
Price
More affordable ($0)
⚠️ Higher cost ($15)
Longevity
🛑 Legacy (Llano (2011−2012) / 32 nm)
🛑 Legacy (Lion (2008−2009) / 65 nm)

💎 Value Proposition

InsightE2-3000MAthlon X2 QL-64
Cost Efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Lower cost efficiency
Upfront Cost
More affordable ($0)
⚠️ Higher cost ($15)

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.

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of E2-3000M and Athlon X2 QL-64

AMD

E2-3000M

The E2-3000M is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2014-01-01. It is based on the Llano (2011−2012) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Base frequency is 1.8 GHz, with boost up to 2.4 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 512K (per core). Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: FS1. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,597 points. Launch price was $50.

AMD

Athlon X2 QL-64

The Athlon X2 QL-64 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 2009-01-01. It is based on the Lion (2008−2009) architecture. It features 2 cores and 2 threads. Max frequency: 2.1 GHz. L3 cache: 0 kB. L2 cache: 1 MB. Built on 65 nm process technology. Socket: S1. Thermal design power (TDP): 1 MB. Passmark benchmark score: 1,614 points. Launch price was $149.

Processing Power

Both the E2-3000M and Athlon X2 QL-64 share an identical 2-core/2-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the E2-3000M versus 2.1 GHz on the Athlon X2 QL-64 — a 13.3% clock advantage for the E2-3000M. The E2-3000M uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the Athlon X2 QL-64 uses Lion (2008−2009) (65 nm). In PassMark, the E2-3000M scores 1,597 against the Athlon X2 QL-64's 1,614 — a 1.1% lead for the Athlon X2 QL-64. Both processors carry 0 kB of L3 cache.

FeatureE2-3000MAthlon X2 QL-64
Cores / Threads
2 / 2
2 / 2
Boost Clock
2.4 GHz+14%
2.1 GHz
Base Clock
1.8 GHz
L3 Cache
0 kB
0 kB
L2 Cache
512K (per core)
1 MB+100%
Process
32 nm-51%
65 nm
Architecture
Llano (2011−2012)
Lion (2008−2009)
PassMark
1,597
1,614+1%
🧠

Memory & Platform

The E2-3000M uses the FS1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the Athlon X2 QL-64 uses S1 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

FeatureE2-3000MAthlon X2 QL-64
Socket
FS1
S1
PCIe Generation
PCIe 2.0
PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed
DDR2-667
Max RAM Capacity
8 GB
RAM Channels
2
ECC Support
PCIe Lanes
0
🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (E2-3000M) / AMD-V (Athlon X2 QL-64).

FeatureE2-3000MAthlon X2 QL-64
Integrated GPU
No
Unlocked
No
AVX-512
No
Virtualization
AMD-V