E2-3000M vs VIA Nano QuadCore L4700

E2-3000M vs VIA Nano QuadCore L4700 Performance Spectrum

E2-3000M

2 / 2

1,597

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5945WX

Ryzen Threadripper PRO 7955WX

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

VIA Nano QuadCore L4700

4 / 4

1,615

+1.1%

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.

E2-3000M vs VIA Nano QuadCore L4700 FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

E2-3000M vs VIA Nano QuadCore L4700: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

E2-3000M

2011

Why buy it

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (1,597 vs 1,615).
❌25% higher power demand at 35W vs 28W.

VIA Nano QuadCore L4700

2011

Why buy it

✅+1.1% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 28W instead of 35W, a 7W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.

Quick Answers

So, is VIA Nano QuadCore L4700 better than E2-3000M?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, E2-3000M is ahead with a 1.3% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, VIA Nano QuadCore L4700 pulls ahead with 1.1% better PassMark.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, VIA Nano QuadCore L4700 is the stronger fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 4 cores and 4 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

VIA Nano QuadCore L4700 still makes the most sense overall. VIA Nano QuadCore L4700 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 1.1% better PassMark.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

VIA Nano QuadCore L4700 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting more multi-core headroom with 4 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/2. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

E2-3000M vs VIA Nano QuadCore L4700 Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

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.

VIA Nano QuadCore L4700

The VIA Nano QuadCore L4700 is manufactured by TSMC. It was released in 12 May 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the CNQ (2011) architecture. It features 4 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.2 GHz, with boost up to 1.47 GHz. L2 cache: 1 MB (per core). Built on 40 nm process technology. Socket: NanoBGA2. Thermal design power (TDP): 28 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 1,615 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

The E2-3000M packs 2 cores / 2 threads, while the VIA Nano QuadCore L4700 offers 4 cores / 4 threads — the VIA Nano QuadCore L4700 has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 2.4 GHz on the E2-3000M versus 1.47 GHz on the VIA Nano QuadCore L4700 — a 48.1% clock advantage for the E2-3000M (base: 1.8 GHz vs 1.2 GHz). The E2-3000M uses the Llano (2011−2012) architecture (32 nm), while the VIA Nano QuadCore L4700 uses CNQ (2011) (40 nm). In PassMark, the E2-3000M scores 1,597 against the VIA Nano QuadCore L4700's 1,615 — a 1.1% lead for the VIA Nano QuadCore L4700.

Feature	E2-3000M	VIA Nano QuadCore L4700
Cores / Threads	2 / 2	4 / 4+100%
Boost Clock	2.4 GHz+63%	1.47 GHz
Base Clock	1.8 GHz+50%	1.2 GHz
L3 Cache	0 kB	—
L2 Cache	512K (per core)+51100%	1 MB (per core)
Process	32 nm-20%	40 nm
Architecture	Llano (2011−2012)	CNQ (2011)
PassMark	1,597	1,615+1%

🧠

Memory & Platform

The E2-3000M uses the FS1 socket (PCIe 2.0), while the VIA Nano QuadCore L4700 uses NanoBGA2 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.