AMD E-350

The AMD E-350 is recorded as a mobile processor with 2 cores and 2 threads. Its architecture is Bobcat, its codename is Zacate, and its generation field is “E (Zacate)”. The database entry lists a base clock of 1600.00 MHz, no boost clock, an 18 W TDP, an integrated Radeon HD 6310, and AMD Socket FT1 as the socket. The part was released on 2011-01-03 and is now end-of-life. The benchmarks array for this entry is empty, the average benchmark score is 0, the percentile against all CPUs is 50, and the nearestRivals array is empty. This means the E-350 is defined by its platform facts rather than by measured workload results.

Platform and Compatibility

The E-350 uses AMD Socket FT1. Its microarchitecture is Bobcat, and its codename is Zacate; the generation field repeats Zacate as “E (Zacate)”. The manufacturing record includes a 40 nm process node and a 75 mm² die size. No foundry is listed, no transistor count is listed, and no series designation is present in the entry.

The compute block consists of 2 cores and 2 threads. Because the core count and thread count are equal, the data does not indicate any simultaneous-multithreading capability. The base clock is 1600.00 MHz, and the boost clock field is null, so no higher operating frequency is recorded. The multiplier is not unlocked, which means the record does not support multiplier-based frequency adjustment.

Cache is recorded per core: 64 KB of L1 and 512 KB of L2 for each core. There is no L3 cache entry. The memory support field lists DDR3. The memory bus is single-channel, and ECC memory is not supported. No memory bandwidth figure is present, so the throughput of the single-channel memory path is not quantified in the database.

The integrated graphics block is Radeon HD 6310. It is the only graphics device listed in the entry. PCIe configuration is null, so the record does not document PCIe generation, lane count, or expansion topology. The part number is EME350GBB22GT, and the market segment is Mobile.

The entry does not include a list of compatible processors for Socket FT1, nor does it provide any other upgrade-path information. The production status is end-of-life, and the release date is 2011-01-03. With no PCIe information and no memory bandwidth measurement, platform expansion and memory throughput cannot be quantified from this record.

Power and Thermals

The E-350 has a TDP of 18 W. That is the only power-related number in the record. In the context of a mobile-market part with 2 cores and integrated graphics, 18 W is a low-power figure.

The highest frequency in the record is the 1600.00 MHz base clock, because the boost clock field is null. Therefore, the power and thermal envelope documented for this part does not include a higher-frequency boost state. The locked multiplier also points to a fixed operating point rather than user-adjustable frequency scaling.

The 40 nm process node and 75 mm² die size are the available manufacturing dimensions. There is no transistor count, so die-level density cannot be calculated. The integrated Radeon HD 6310 is part of the same entry, and no separate graphics power figure is listed.

An 18 W TDP implies a modest thermal solution. The record does not specify any cooler, fan, or passive cooling device, but the TDP class is low enough that a high-airflow desktop cooling solution is not indicated by the data. Because the production status is end-of-life, thermal guidance applies to existing systems rather than to new platform designs.

Who Should Consider It

The E-350’s workload envelope is defined by 2 threads, a 1600.00 MHz base clock, no L3 cache, single-channel DDR3 memory, and the integrated Radeon HD 6310. Any workload that needs more than 2 threads will exceed the thread count recorded for this part.

Office-style tasks that are lightly threaded fit the structural shape of the E-350, but the database contains no benchmark score to confirm actual responsiveness. The Mobile market segment and the 18 W TDP point toward low-power systems. The end-of-life status means this is not a forward-looking socket for new system builds.

Gaming cannot be evaluated from the data: no gaming benchmark is attached, and the only graphics device is the integrated Radeon HD 6310. Creation workloads that rely on multithreading or large caches are also not supported by the data, because the E-350 has 2 threads and no L3 cache.

Users who require ECC memory will not be served, as the ECC field is false. Users who require documented PCIe expansion will not find any PCIe support in the record. Users who require an unlocked multiplier are also outside the stated capabilities of this entry.

The release date of 2011-01-03 places the E-350 at an earlier point in the database timeline. The average benchmark score of 0 and the empty benchmarks array mean there is no measured evidence for any specific workload recommendation. The E-350 can only be considered for workloads that fit a 2-thread, single-channel, integrated-graphics mobile platform, and that do not depend on benchmark scores absent from the record.

How It Compares

The nearestRivals array for the E-350 is empty. There are no rival names, no rival scores, and no deltaPct values. Consequently, the E-350 cannot be compared to any specific CPU using the standard nearest-rival framework of this database.

The only comparative metric in the record is percentileVsAllCpus: 50. This is a midpoint rank in the all-CPU distribution. However, because the rival list is empty, the CPUs above and below that midpoint are not identified.

The empty nearestRivals array is a structural property of this entry. It means no percentage lead or deficit can be quoted. Any statement such as “ahead of rival X” or “behind rival Y” would require data that the record does not contain.

The absence of nearestRivals also means no deltaPct values can be analyzed. In entries with populated rival data, deltaPct would supply the exact percentage gap to a named competitor. Here, no such gap exists in the data.

The E-350’s relative position is therefore limited to the 50th percentile. That position is not accompanied by any named competitor, so its usefulness for direct comparison is limited.

Benchmark Performance

The benchmarks array is empty. The avgBenchmarkScore field is 0, which is the aggregate result of having no benchmark submissions. There are no multi-core scores, no single-core scores, and no graphics workload scores in the record.

The percentileVsAllCpus value is 50. This is the only performance-related rank in the entry. It indicates that the E-350 sits at the median of the all-CPU distribution, but the lack of individual scores prevents any cross-check of that rank.

The structural performance indicators are the 2 cores, 2 threads, 1600.00 MHz base clock, no boost clock, 64 KB L1 cache per core, 512 KB L2 cache per core, no L3 cache, single-channel DDR3 memory, and integrated Radeon HD 6310. These are the only resources available for executing workloads.

No exact percentage delta to a rival can be reported because the nearestRivals array is empty. The deltaPct field, which would normally supply that value, is not present for any competitor. Therefore, no measured “x% ahead” or “x% behind” statement is possible from this data.

The 0 average score is not a performance result from a benchmark run; it is the mathematical result of an empty benchmark list. The 50th percentile is not tied to any score or rival in the record. In quantitative workload terms, the benchmark performance of the E-350 is undefined.

The integrated Radeon HD 6310 is the only graphics processing resource, but no graphics score exists to measure its capability. The absence of a memory bandwidth figure further limits what can be said about memory-bound performance. The locked multiplier and absent boost clock remove frequency flexibility from the performance picture.

Overall, the database entry for the E-350 reports a low-power, mobile, 2-thread platform with integrated graphics, a median all-CPU percentile, and no measured benchmark data. The nearestRivals array is empty, and the avgBenchmarkScore is 0. The E-350’s position in this database is therefore structural rather than performance-based.