AMD C-60 vs AMD E-350
Comparative analysis of AMD C-60 and AMD E-350 processors for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Performance, Memory, Compatibility, Virtualization. Benchmark processor performance analysis: PassMark - Single thread mark, PassMark - CPU mark, Geekbench 4 - Single Core, Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core, CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s), CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps).
Differences
Reasons to consider the AMD C-60
- CPU is newer: launch date 9 month(s) later
- 2x lower typical power consumption: 9 Watt vs 18 Watt
Launch date | 22 August 2011 vs 9 November 2010 |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 9 Watt vs 18 Watt |
Reasons to consider the AMD E-350
- Around 20% higher clock speed: 1.6 GHz vs 1.33 GHz
- Around 38% better performance in PassMark - Single thread mark: 487 vs 354
- Around 47% better performance in PassMark - CPU mark: 425 vs 290
- Around 25% better performance in Geekbench 4 - Single Core: 135 vs 108
- Around 27% better performance in Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core: 250 vs 197
- Around 12% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s): 0.522 vs 0.467
- Around 76% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s): 1.936 vs 1.102
- Around 20% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s): 0.036 vs 0.03
- Around 26% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s): 2.275 vs 1.801
- Around 49% better performance in CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s): 0.725 vs 0.487
- 24.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames): 244 vs 10
- Around 57% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames): 887 vs 564
- 24.4x better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps): 244 vs 10
- Around 57% better performance in GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps): 887 vs 564
Specifications (specs) | |
Maximum frequency | 1.6 GHz vs 1.33 GHz |
Benchmarks | |
PassMark - Single thread mark | 487 vs 354 |
PassMark - CPU mark | 425 vs 290 |
Geekbench 4 - Single Core | 135 vs 108 |
Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core | 250 vs 197 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 0.522 vs 0.467 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1.936 vs 1.102 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.036 vs 0.03 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 2.275 vs 1.801 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 0.725 vs 0.487 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 244 vs 10 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 887 vs 564 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 244 vs 10 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 887 vs 564 |
Compare benchmarks
CPU 1: AMD C-60
CPU 2: AMD E-350
PassMark - Single thread mark |
|
|
||||
PassMark - CPU mark |
|
|
||||
Geekbench 4 - Single Core |
|
|
||||
Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) |
|
|
||||
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) |
|
|
||||
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) |
|
|
Name | AMD C-60 | AMD E-350 |
---|---|---|
PassMark - Single thread mark | 354 | 487 |
PassMark - CPU mark | 290 | 425 |
Geekbench 4 - Single Core | 108 | 135 |
Geekbench 4 - Multi-Core | 197 | 250 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Face Detection (mPixels/s) | 0.467 | 0.522 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 1.102 | 1.936 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.03 | 0.036 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Video Composition (Frames/s) | 1.801 | 2.275 |
CompuBench 1.5 Desktop - Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 0.487 | 0.725 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) | 10 | 244 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Frames) | 564 | 887 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 10 | 244 |
GFXBench 4.0 - Manhattan (Fps) | 564 | 887 |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Frames) | 1798 | |
GFXBench 4.0 - T-Rex (Fps) | 1798 |
Compare specifications (specs)
AMD C-60 | AMD E-350 | |
---|---|---|
Essentials |
||
Architecture codename | Ontario | Zacate |
Launch date | 22 August 2011 | 9 November 2010 |
Place in performance rating | 3286 | 3015 |
Series | AMD C-Series | AMD E-Series |
Vertical segment | Laptop | Laptop |
Performance |
||
64 bit support | ||
Die size | 75 mm | 75 mm |
L1 cache | 128 KB | 128 KB |
L2 cache | 1024 KB | 1024 KB |
Manufacturing process technology | 40 nm | 40 nm |
Maximum frequency | 1.33 GHz | 1.6 GHz |
Number of cores | 2 | 2 |
Number of threads | 2 | 2 |
Memory |
||
Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
Compatibility |
||
Max number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 |
Sockets supported | FT1 BGA 413-Ball | FT1 BGA 413-Ball |
Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 9 Watt | 18 Watt |
Virtualization |
||
AMD Virtualization (AMD-V™) |