Intel Celeron 6305 vs AMD E-240

VS
Performance
Celeron 6305620% better
1,935.55% of 36,991
E-240
2691% of 36,991

The Celeron 6305 has 620% better performance than the E-240 for the 3DMark 11 Performance Physics benchmark.

Performance per dollar
Celeron 6305
No data available
E-240
No data available

We do not have any performance per dollar data for the Celeron 6305 and the E-240 for the 3DMark 11 Performance Physics benchmark.

Shop Celeron 6305
As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases.

Summary

#

About the Intel Celeron 6305 CPU

The Intel Celeron 6305 is a 2-core (2-thread) processor built for the mobile CPU market. The 6305 is compatible with FCBGA1449 motherboards and is fabricated on a 10 nm manufacturing process. It features the Intel UHD Graphics for 11th Gen Intel Processors integrated graphics solution.

Memory and Cache

In terms of cache, the Celeron 6305 has multiple levels of cache. Its L1 cache, which is the smallest and fastest, is 160 KB in size, providing rapid access to crucial instructions. Its L2 cache, at 2.5 MB, is larger but slower than the L1. Its L3 cache, a shared resource among the CPU's cores, has a capacity of 4 MB.

Cores and Clock Speeds

The Celeron 6305 features 2 total cores which can process 2 threads simultaneously. The multi-threading capability allows the CPU to execute multiple computational tasks in parallel. The base clock speed of the CPU is 1800.0 MHz. Higher clock speeds result in higher performance for the same microarchitecture.

Integrated Graphics

The Celeron 6305 includes an integrated graphics solution called Intel UHD Graphics for 11th Gen Intel Processors. This graphics processor is directly integrated into the CPU and is not as powerful as a dedicated graphics card. While integrated graphics can handle basic tasks like web browsing and office applications, it is not suitable for more demanding activities such as gaming or video editing, where a dedicated graphics card offers superior performance.

Benchmark Performance

The Celeron 6305 has the 619th best 3DMark 11 Performance Physics score among the 721 benchmarked CPUs in our database. It achieves 5.23% of the performance of the best benchmarked CPU, the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D.

About the AMD E-240 CPU

The AMD E-240 is an end-of-life 1-core (1-thread) processor built for the mobile CPU market. It launched in Q1 2011. It is part of AMD's E lineup, which is based on the Zacate microarchitecture. The E-240 is compatible with AMD Socket FT1 motherboards and is fabricated on a 40 nm manufacturing process. It features the Radeon HD 6310 integrated graphics solution.

Memory and Cache

The E-240 supports DDR3 memory and features a single-channel memory controller, allowing it to utilize 1 memory modules simultaneously. In terms of cache, the E-240 has multiple levels of cache. Its L1 cache, which is the smallest and fastest, is 64 KB in size, providing rapid access to crucial instructions. Its L2 cache, at 512 KB, is larger but slower than the L1.

Cores and Clock Speeds

The E-240 is a single-core and single-threaded CPU, making it not capable of processing multiple computational tasks in parallel. The base clock speed of the CPU is 1500.0 MHz. Higher clock speeds result in higher performance for the same microarchitecture. The multiplier is locked, making it incapable of overclocking for pushing performance further.

Integrated Graphics

The E-240 includes an integrated graphics solution called Radeon HD 6310. This graphics processor is directly integrated into the CPU and is not as powerful as a dedicated graphics card. While integrated graphics can handle basic tasks like web browsing and office applications, it is not suitable for more demanding activities such as gaming or video editing, where a dedicated graphics card offers superior performance.

Benchmark Performance

The E-240 has the 721st best 3DMark 11 Performance Physics score among the 721 benchmarked CPUs in our database. It achieves 0.73% of the performance of the best benchmarked CPU, the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D.

General Info

General overview of the CPU, including details like its manufacturer, release date, launch price, and current production status.

InfoCeleron 6305E-240
ManufacturerIntelAMD
Series--E
Market SegmentMobileMobile
Release Date--Q1 2011
Production Status--End-of-life
ShopCheck PriceCheck Price

Benchmark Performance

#
Performance
Celeron 6305620% better
1,935.55% of 36,991
E-240
2691% of 36,991

The Celeron 6305 has 620% better performance than the E-240 for the 3DMark 11 Performance Physics benchmark.

The Celeron 6305 is ranked 619th with a score of 1,935.5, and the E-240 is ranked 721st with a score of 269.

Performance per dollar
Celeron 6305
No data available
E-240
No data available

We do not have any performance per dollar data for the Celeron 6305 and the E-240 for the 3DMark 11 Performance Physics benchmark.

Relative Performance

The average score in the benchmark test can be compared to similar CPUs to assess relative performance. Generally, powerful CPUs tend to have higher scores.

Choose Baseline CPU:Celeron 6305 or
CPUBenchmark Performance
A6-52001,964.5+1%
Phenom II X4 N9701,940+0%
Celeron 63051,935.5
Celeron N34501,925-1%
Core i3-2365M1,915-1%
C-70517-73%
C-50374-81%
E-240269-86%

Relative Value For Money

The average performance per dollar in the benchmark test can be compared to similar CPUs to assess relative value. A higher score implies a better value for your money.

Choose Baseline CPU:Celeron 6305 orE-240
CPUPerformance Per Dollar
Our database does not have enough data to compare the benchmark performance per dollar with other CPUs.

Benchmark Scores

This table showcases the average performance scores achieved by both CPUs across industry-standard benchmark tests. These scores provide a valuable insight into overall performance. Powerful CPUs tend to have higher scores.

  • Popular
BenchmarkCeleron 6305E-240
3DMark 11 Performance Physics
1,935.5
(+619.52%)
269
Cinebench R15 Multi-Core
161.1
--
Cinebench R15 Single-Core
84
--
Geekbench 6.2 Multi-Core
1,236
--
Geekbench 6.2 Single-Core
744
--
CPU Mark Multi-Thread
2,089
(+971.28%)
195
CPU Mark Single-Thread
1,197
(+197.02%)
403
Benchmarks Source: Notebookcheck

Technical Specs

#

Manufacturing Details

Information about the CPU's manufacturing like its foundry, process size, and transistor count.

SpecCeleron 6305E-240
ManufacturerIntelAMD
Process Size10 nm40 nm

Architecture

CPU architecture specs like its memory channels, memory support, and microarchitecture. Newer CPU architectures can minimize bottlenecks and improve execution efficiency using more advanced techniques.

SpecCeleron 6305E-240
Series--E
Microarchitecture--Zacate
CodenameTiger LakeZacate
Memory Support--DDR3
Memory Channels--Single-channel
ECC Memory--No

Cores & Clock Speeds

Processing power information like its cores and clock speed. These specs impact how fast they can handle instructions and tasks. These have a strong impact on the CPU's performance.

SpecCeleron 6305E-240
Cores21
Threads21
Clock Speed1800.0 MHz1500.0 MHz
Base Clock--100 MHz
Multiplier--15.0x
Multiplier Unlocked--No

Cache

CPU cache specs like its L1 & L2 cache. These provide the CPU with a small, but super-fast memory access. A larger cache can improve a CPU's performance.

SpecCeleron 6305E-240
L1 Cache160 KB64 KB
L2 Cache2.5 MB512 KB
L3 Cache4 MB--

Compatibility & Power Consumption

Compatibility and power consumption information like its socket type, thermal design power, power limits. These can help verify the CPU's compatibility with other PC components.

SpecCeleron 6305E-240
SocketFCBGA1449AMD Socket FT1
Thermal Design Power (TDP)15 W18 W
TJ Max100 °C--

Graphics, Features, & Extensions

Additional CPU features like its bundled coolers, integrated graphics, and extensions/technologies.

SpecCeleron 6305E-240
Integrated GraphicsIntel UHD Graphics for 11th Gen Intel ProcessorsRadeon HD 6310
Extensions / Technologies--MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4a, AMD64, AMD-V

Check out these comparisons for similar CPUs:

Looking for alternatives? Check out these similar CPUs:

* Performance rating, performance per dollar, and rankings are based on the 3DMark 11 Performance Physics benchmark and MSRP.