AMD E-300 vs AMD E1-1200

AMD E-300

► remove

The AMD E-300 (codename Zacate) is a dual core processor for small notebooks and netbooks. It offers a relatively powerful integrated graphics card and a single channel DDR3-1066 memory controller.

Inside the E-300 two Bobcat cores can access 512KB level 2 cache per core. In comparison to the Atom processors, the Bobcat architecture uses an "out-of-order" execution and is therefore faster at the same clock speed. However, the performance is far worse than similar clocked Penryn (Celeron) or Danube (Athlon II) cores. On average the cpu performance of the E-300 lies a bit beyond a Athlon X2 L310 at 1.2 GHz

The integrated Radeon HD 6310 graphics card offers 80 shaders and an UVD3 video processor. Compared to the slow GMA 3150 in the Atom processors, the HD6310 offers a lot more performance and is about as fast as the Nvidia ION graphics solution. Furthermore, the E-300 also support HTMI 1.4a.

The power consumption is rated with a TDP of 18 Watt by AMD. According to first reviews of Brazos prototypes the power consumption was between 11 to 29 Watt. This would be on a level of a (much more powerful) 11" MacBook Air using Windows 7.

AMD E1-1200

► remove

The AMD E1-1200 (codename Zacate) is a dual core processor for small notebooks and netbooks. It offers a relatively powerful integrated graphics card and a single channel DDR3-1066 memory controller. Compared to the old E-300, which is based on the same chip, the E1-1200 offers a 100 MHz higher CPU clock rate.

Inside the E1-1200 two Bobcat cores can access 512KB level 2 cache per core. In comparison to the Atom processors, the Bobcat architecture uses an "out-of-order" execution and is therefore faster at the same clock speed. However, the performance is far worse than similar clocked Penryn (Celeron) or Danube (Athlon II) cores. On average the cpu performance of the E-300 lies a bit beyond a Athlon X2 L310 at 1.2 GHz

The integrated Radeon HD 7310 graphics card offers 80 shaders and an UVD3 video processor. Compared to the slow GMA 3150 in the Atom processors, the HD7310 offers a lot more performance and is about as fast as the Nvidia ION graphics solution. In the E1-1200 the 7310 is clocked at 500 MHz and therefore not much different to the HD 6310 (488 - 500 MHz depending on the APU).

The power consumption is rated with a TDP of 18 Watt by AMD. According to first reviews of Brazos prototypes the power consumption was between 11 to 29 Watt. This would be on a level of a (much more powerful) 11" MacBook Air using Windows 7.

AMD E-300AMD E1-1200
AMD E-SeriesAMD E-Series
ZacateZacate
: E-Series Zacate
AMD E2-2000 (compare)1750 MHz2 / 2
AMD E2-1800 (compare)1700 MHz2 / 2
AMD E-450 (compare)1650 MHz2 / 2
AMD E-350 (compare)1600 MHz2 / 2
AMD E1-1500 (compare)1480 MHz2 / 2
AMD E1-12001400 MHz2 / 2
» AMD E-3001300 MHz2 / 2
AMD E-240 (compare)1500 MHz1 / 1
AMD E2-2000 (compare)1750 MHz2 / 2
AMD E2-1800 (compare)1700 MHz2 / 2
AMD E-450 (compare)1650 MHz2 / 2
AMD E-350 (compare)1600 MHz2 / 2
AMD E1-1500 (compare)1480 MHz2 / 2
» AMD E1-12001400 MHz2 / 2
AMD E-3001300 MHz2 / 2
AMD E-240 (compare)1500 MHz1 / 1
1300 MHz1400 MHz
128 KB128 KB
1 MB1 MB
2 / 22 / 2
18 18
40 40
75 mm275 mm2
FT1 BGA 413-BallFT1 BGA 413-Ball
MMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-VMMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-V
iGPUAMD Radeon HD 6310

Cinebench R11.5 - CPU Multi 64Bit
min: 0.46     avg: 0.5     median: 0.5 (2%)     max: 0.5 Points
min: 0.47     avg: 0.5     median: 0.5 (2%)     max: 0.54 Points
Cinebench R11.5 - CPU Single 64Bit
min: 0.24     avg: 0.3     median: 0.3 (10%)     max: 0.26 Points
min: 0.27     avg: 0.3     median: 0.3 (11%)     max: 0.28 Points
Cinebench R10 - Rendering Single 32Bit
853 Points (9%)
min: 888     avg: 906     median: 912 (10%)     max: 918 Points
Cinebench R10 - Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
1176 Points (2%)
min: 1654     avg: 1709     median: 1682 (3%)     max: 1791 Points
Cinebench R10 - Rendering Multiple CPUs 64Bit
min: 1714     avg: 1761.5     median: 1761.5 (2%)     max: 1809 Points
min: 1887     avg: 1908.7     median: 1913 (3%)     max: 1926 Points
Cinebench R10 - Rendering Single CPUs 64Bit
min: 899     avg: 920     median: 920 (9%)     max: 941 Points
min: 984     avg: 1000     median: 1008 (10%)     max: 1008 Points
wPrime 2.0x - 1024m *
2511 seconds (30%)
min: 2347     avg: 2478.6     median: 2410 (28%)     max: 2678.85 seconds
wPrime 2.0x - 32m *
79 seconds (16%)
min: 74     avg: 78.7     median: 76 (15%)     max: 86.187 seconds
WinRAR - Result
min: 398     avg: 417.5     median: 417.5 (5%)     max: 437 KB/s
3DMark 06 - CPU
min: 836     avg: 838.5     median: 838.5 (6%)     max: 841 Points
min: 837     avg: 872.3     median: 873.5 (6%)     max: 905 Points
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M *
min: 59     avg: 59.5     median: 59.5 (13%)     max: 60 Seconds
min: 48.435     avg: 54.2     median: 57 (12%)     max: 57 Seconds
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M *
min: 132     avg: 133.5     median: 133.5 (6%)     max: 135 Seconds
min: 110.502     avg: 120.8     median: 124 (5%)     max: 128 Seconds
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M *
min: 2920     avg: 2940.5     median: 2940.5 (13%)     max: 2961 Seconds
min: 2717.76     avg: 2754.6     median: 2766 (12%)     max: 2780 Seconds
SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS)
8000 MIPS (4%)
SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS)
6460 MFLOPS (5%)
Windows 7 Experience Index - Processor
3.4 points (44%)
min: 3.4     avg: 3.5     median: 3.6 (46%)     max: 3.6 points
3DMark Vantage - P CPU no PhysX 1280x1024
min: 1544     avg: 1579.5     median: 1579.5 (3%)     max: 1615 Points
min: 1347     avg: 1594     median: 1645.5 (3%)     max: 1738 Points
3DMark 11 - Performance Physics 1280x720
min: 598     avg: 602.3     median: 604 (3%)     max: 605 points
3DMark - Ice Storm Standard Physics 1280x720
8205 Points (5%)
3DMark - Cloud Gate Standard Physics 1280x720
596 Points (2%)
3DMark - Fire Strike Physics 1920x1080
748 Points (3%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Stream
1437 Points (12%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Memory
1179 Points (11%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Floating Point
1597 Points (5%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Integer
1433 Points (4%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Total Score
1440 Points (6%)

Average Benchmarks AMD E-300 → 100%

Average Benchmarks AMD E1-1200 → 104%

-
-
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance
1 This benchmark is not used for the average calculation

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

restrict list:

show all (including archived), 2019, 2018
v1.8.1a
Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Benchmarks / Tech > Processor Comparison - Head 2 Head
Redaktion, 2017-09- 8 (Update: 2017-09-11)