AMD E-450 vs AMD E2-2000 vs AMD E1-1200

AMD E-450

► remove

The AMD E-450 (codename Zacate) is a dual core processor for small notebooks and netbooks. It offers a relatively powerful integrated graphics card and a single channel DDR3-1333 memory controller. Compared to the older E-350, the E-450 offers only 60MHz more clock speed, but a faster graphics card (thanks to Turbo Core) and DDR3-1333 and HDMI 1.4a support.

Inside the E-450 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-450 lies a bit beyond a Celeron SU2300 at 1.2 GHz or a Athlon II Neo K325 at 1.3 GHz. 

The integrated Radeon HD 6320 graphics card offers 80 shaders and an UVD3 video processor. Compared to the slow GMA 3150 in the Atom processors, the HD6320 offers a lot more performance and is about as fast as the Nvidia ION graphics solution.

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 E2-2000

► remove

The AMD E2-2000 (codename Zacate) is a dual core processor for small notebooks and netbooks. It offers a relatively powerful integrated graphics card and a single channel DDR3-1333 memory controller. Compared to the older E2-1800 offers only slightly higher CPU (50 MHz) and GPU (15 - 20 MHz) clock rates.

Inside the E2-2000 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 E2-2000 is a bit below a Celeron SU2300 at 1.2 GHz or a Athlon II Neo K325 at 1.3 GHz. 

The integrated Radeon HD 7340 graphics card offers 80 shaders, clocked at 538 - 700 MHz, and an UVD3 video processor. Compared to the slow GMA 3150 in the Atom processors, the HD7340 offers a lot more performance and is about as fast as the Nvidia ION graphics solution.

The power consumption is rated with a TDP of 18 W by AMD. That's about the same level as Intels (significantly faster) ULV CPUs.

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-450AMD E2-2000AMD E1-1200
AMD E-SeriesAMD E-SeriesAMD E-Series
ZacateZacateZacate
: E-Series Zacate
AMD E2-20001750 MHz2 / 2
AMD E2-18001700 MHz2 / 2
» AMD E-4501650 MHz2 / 2
AMD E-3501600 MHz2 / 2
AMD E1-15001480 MHz2 / 2
AMD E1-12001400 MHz2 / 2
AMD E-3001300 MHz2 / 2
AMD E-2401500 MHz1 / 1
» AMD E2-20001750 MHz2 / 2
AMD E2-18001700 MHz2 / 2
AMD E-4501650 MHz2 / 2
AMD E-3501600 MHz2 / 2
AMD E1-15001480 MHz2 / 2
AMD E1-12001400 MHz2 / 2
AMD E-3001300 MHz2 / 2
AMD E-2401500 MHz1 / 1
AMD E2-20001750 MHz2 / 2
AMD E2-18001700 MHz2 / 2
AMD E-4501650 MHz2 / 2
AMD E-3501600 MHz2 / 2
AMD E1-15001480 MHz2 / 2
» AMD E1-12001400 MHz2 / 2
AMD E-3001300 MHz2 / 2
AMD E-2401500 MHz1 / 1
1650 MHz1750 MHz1400 MHz
128 KB128 KB128 KB
1 MB1 MB1 MB
2 / 22 / 22 / 2
18 18 18
40 40 40
75 mm275 mm275 mm2
FT1 BGA 413-BallFT1 BGA 413-BallFT1 BGA 413-Ball
MMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-VMMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-VMMX(+), SSE(1,2,3,3S,4A), AMD-V

Cinebench R11.5 - CPU Multi 64Bit
0.6 Points (1%)
0.5 Points (1%)
Cinebench R11.5 - CPU Single 64Bit
0.3 Points (16%)
0.3 Points (14%)
Cinebench R10 - Rendering Single 32Bit
min: 665     avg: 1012.8     median: 1062 (11%)     max: 1077 Points
min: 888     avg: 906     median: 912 (9%)     max: 918 Points
Cinebench R10 - Rendering Multiple CPUs 32Bit
min: 1568     avg: 1960.9     median: 2020 (3%)     max: 2082 Points
min: 1654     avg: 1709     median: 1682 (3%)     max: 1791 Points
Cinebench R10 - Rendering Multiple CPUs 64Bit
min: 1968     avg: 2204.1     median: 2216 (3%)     max: 2299 Points
min: 1887     avg: 1908.7     median: 1913 (3%)     max: 1926 Points
Cinebench R10 - Rendering Single CPUs 64Bit
min: 1011     avg: 1137.4     median: 1170 (11%)     max: 1180 Points
min: 984     avg: 1000     median: 1008 (10%)     max: 1008 Points
wPrime 2.0x - 1024m *
min: 2006     avg: 2017.3     median: 2021 (24%)     max: 2025 seconds
min: 2347     avg: 2478.6     median: 2410 (28%)     max: 2678 seconds
wPrime 2.0x - 32m *
min: 62     avg: 65.2     median: 64 (13%)     max: 69 seconds
min: 74     avg: 78.7     median: 76 (15%)     max: 86 seconds
WinRAR - Result
min: 485     avg: 491     median: 489 (6%)     max: 499 KB/s
min: 398     avg: 417.5     median: 417 (5%)     max: 437 KB/s
X264 HD Benchmark 4.0 - Pass 2
2.9 fps (2%)
X264 HD Benchmark 4.0 - Pass 1
16.2 fps (6%)
TrueCrypt - Serpent Mean 100MB
0.1 GB/s (3%)
TrueCrypt - Twofish Mean 100MB
0.1 GB/s (2%)
TrueCrypt - AES Mean 100MB
0.4 GB/s (2%)
3DMark 06 - CPU
min: 1004     avg: 1029.9     median: 1034 (7%)     max: 1070 Points
min: 837     avg: 872.3     median: 873 (6%)     max: 905 Points
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M *
min: 47     avg: 47.7     median: 47 (10%)     max: 48 Seconds
min: 48     avg: 54.2     median: 57 (12%)     max: 57 Seconds
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M *
min: 105     avg: 107.1     median: 107 (5%)     max: 109 Seconds
min: 110     avg: 120.8     median: 124 (5%)     max: 128 Seconds
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M *
min: 2334     avg: 2363.9     median: 2369 (11%)     max: 2384 Seconds
min: 2717     avg: 2754.6     median: 2766 (12%)     max: 2780 Seconds
SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS)
9480 MIPS (4%)
8000 MIPS (4%)
SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS)
7530 MFLOPS (6%)
6460 MFLOPS (5%)
PCMark 05 - Standard 1024x768
3310 Points (21%)
Windows 7 Experience Index - Processor
3.9 points (55%)
3.5 points (50%)
3DMark Vantage - P CPU no PhysX 1280x1024
min: 1625     avg: 1863.9     median: 1892 (3%)     max: 2123 Points
min: 1347     avg: 1594     median: 1645 (2%)     max: 1738 Points
3DMark 11 - Performance Physics 1280x720
min: 587     avg: 681.1     median: 703 (4%)     max: 721 points
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 (2%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Stream
1437 Points (12%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Memory
1179 Points (11%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Floating Point
1597 Points (3%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Integer
1433 Points (2%)
Geekbench 2 - 32 Bit - Total Score
1440 Points (3%)

Average Benchmarks AMD E-450 → 100%

Average Benchmarks AMD E1-1200 → 93%

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

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)