Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 vs Intel Celeron G5900 Benchmarks, Specs, Performance Comparison and Differences
|
|
|
|
|
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 vs Intel Celeron G5900
Comparison of the technical characteristics between the processors, with the Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 on one side and the Intel Celeron G5900 on the other side. The first is dedicated to the desktop sector, It has 2 cores, 2 threads, a maximum frequency of 3,0GHz. The second is used on the desktop segment, it has a total of 2 cores, 2 threads, its turbo frequency is set to 3,4 GHz. The following table also compares the lithography, the number of transistors (if indicated), the amount of cache memory, the maximum RAM memory capacity, the type of memory accepted, the release date, the maximum number of PCIe lanes, the values obtained in Geekbench 4 and Cinebench R15.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
This page contains references to products from one or more of our advertisers. We may receive compensation when you click on links to those products. For an explanation of our advertising policy, please visit this page.
Specification comparison:
| Processor | Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 | Intel Celeron G5900 | ||||||
| Market (main) | Desktop | Desktop | ||||||
| ISA | x86-64 (64 bit) | x86-64 (64 bit) | ||||||
| Microarchitecture | Penryn | Comet Lake | ||||||
| Core name | Wolfdale | Comet Lake-S | ||||||
| Family | Core 2 Duo 8000 | Celeron 5000 | ||||||
| Part number(s), S-Spec |
BX80570E8400, |
BX80701G5900, |
||||||
| Release date | Q1 2008 | Q2 2020 | ||||||
| Lithography | 45 nm | 14 nm | ||||||
| Transistors | 410. 000.000 |
— | ||||||
| Cores | 2 | 2 | ||||||
| Threads | 2 | 2 | ||||||
| Base frequency | 3,0 GHz | 3,4 GHz | ||||||
| Turbo frequency | — | — | ||||||
| Cache memory | 6 MB | 2 MB | ||||||
| Max memory capacity | 8 GB | 128 GB | ||||||
| Memory types |
DDR2-800 |
DDR4-2666 |
||||||
| Max PCIe lanes | 16 | 16 | ||||||
| TDP | 65 W | 58 W | ||||||
| Suggested PSU | 600W ATX Power Supply | 600W ATX Power Supply | ||||||
| GPU integrated graphics | None | Intel UHD Graphics 610 (Comet Lake) | ||||||
| GPU execution units | — | 12 | ||||||
| GPU shading units | — | 96 | ||||||
| GPU base clock | — | 350 MHz | ||||||
| GPU boost clock | — | 1050 MHz | ||||||
| GPU FP32 floating point | — | 201,6 GFLOPS | ||||||
| Socket | LGA775 | LGA1200 | ||||||
| Compatible motherboard | Socket LGA 775 Motherboard | Socket LGA 1200 Motherboard | ||||||
| Maximum temperature | 72. 4°C |
100°C | ||||||
| Cinebench R15 single thread | 101 | 142 | ||||||
| Cinebench R15 multi-thread | 175 | 254 | ||||||
| Cinebench R20 single thread | 199 | 296 | ||||||
| Cinebench R20 multi-thread | 346 | 546 | ||||||
| PassMark single thread | 1.233 | 2.137 | ||||||
| PassMark CPU Mark | 1.151 | 2.738 | ||||||
| (Windows 64-bit) Geekbench 4 single core |
1.831 | 3.865 | ||||||
| (Windows 64-bit) Geekbench 4 multi-core |
3. 028 |
6.552 | ||||||
| (SGEMM) GFLOPS performance |
28,9 GFLOPS | 48,4 GFLOPS | ||||||
| (Multi-core / watt performance) Performance / watt ratio |
47 pts / W | 113 pts / W | ||||||
| Amazon | ||||||||
| eBay |
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above.
We can better compare what are the technical differences between the two processors.
Suggested PSU: We assume that we have An ATX computer case, a high end graphics card, 16GB RAM, a 512GB SSD, a 1TB HDD hard drive, a Blu-Ray drive. We will have to rely on a more powerful power supply if we want to have several graphics cards, several monitors, more memory, etc.
Price: For technical reasons, we cannot currently display a price less than 24 hours, or a real-time price. This is why we prefer for the moment not to show a price. You should refer to the respective online stores for the latest price, as well as availability.
We see that the two processors have an equivalent number of cores, the turbo frequency of Intel Celeron G5900 is bigger, that the thermal dissipation power of Intel Celeron G5900 is less. The Intel Celeron G5900 was started more recently.
Performance comparison with the benchmarks:
Performance comparison between the two processors, for this we consider the results generated on benchmark software such as Geekbench 4.
| Cinebench R15 — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
|---|---|
| Intel Celeron G5900 |
142 254 |
| Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 |
101 175 |
In single core, the difference is 41%.
In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 45%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Cinebench R15 evaluates the performance of CPU calculations by restoring a photorealistic 3D scene. The scene has 2,000 objects, 300,000 polygons, uses sharp and fuzzy reflections, bright areas, shadows, procedural shaders, antialiasing, and so on. The faster the rendering of the scene is created, the more powerful the PC is, with a high number of points.
| Cinebench R20 — Multi-thread & single thread score | |
|---|---|
| Intel Celeron G5900 |
296 546 |
| Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 |
199 346 |
In single core, the difference is 49%.
In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 58%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Cinebench R20 is a multi-platform test software which allows to evaluate the hardware capacities of a device such as a computer, a tablet, a server. This version of Cinebench takes into account recent developments in processors with multiple cores and the latest improvements in rendering techniques. The evaluation is ultimately even more relevant.
| PassMark — CPU Mark & single thread | |
|---|---|
| Intel Celeron G5900 |
2.137 2.738 |
| Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 |
1.233 1.151 |
In single core, the difference is 73%.
In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 138%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
PassMark is a benchmarking software that performs several performance tests including prime numbers, integers, floating point, compression, physics, extended instructions, encoding, sorting. The higher the score is, the higher is the device capacity.
On Windows 64-bit:
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-core & single core score — Windows 64-bit | |
|---|---|
| Intel Celeron G5900 |
3.865 6.552 |
| Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 |
1.831 3.028 |
In single core, the difference is 111%.
In multi-core, the difference in terms of gap is 116%.
Note: Commissions may be earned from the links above. These scores are only an
average of the performances got with these processors, you may get different results.
Geekbench 4 is a complete benchmark platform with several types of tests, including data compression, images, AES encryption, SQL encoding, HTML, PDF file rendering, matrix computation, Fast Fourier Transform, 3D object simulation, photo editing, memory testing. This allows us to better visualize the respective power of these devices. For each result, we took an average of 250 values on the famous benchmark software.
Equivalence:
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 AMD equivalentIntel Celeron G5900 AMD equivalent
See also:
Intel Celeron G5905
Intel Celeron N4000 vs Intel Core 2 Duo E8400
Comparative analysis of Intel Celeron N4000 and Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 processors for all known characteristics in the following categories: Essentials, Performance, Memory, Graphics, Graphics interfaces, Graphics image quality, Graphics API support, Compatibility, Peripherals, Security & Reliability, Advanced Technologies, Virtualization.
Benchmark processor performance analysis: PassMark — Single thread mark, PassMark — CPU mark, Geekbench 4 — Single Core, Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core, GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike — Physics Score, 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).
Intel Celeron N4000
Buy on Amazon
vs
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400
Buy on Amazon
Differences
Reasons to consider the Intel Celeron N4000
- CPU is newer: launch date 9 year(s) 11 month(s) later
- Around 45% higher maximum core temperature: 105 °C vs 72.
4°C - A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor: 14 nm vs 45 nm
- 10.8x lower typical power consumption: 6 Watt vs 65 Watt
- Around 21% better performance in PassMark — CPU mark: 1419 vs 1174
| Launch date | 11 December 2017 vs January 2008 |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C vs 72.4°C |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm vs 45 nm |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 6 Watt vs 65 Watt |
| PassMark — CPU mark | 1419 vs 1174 |
Reasons to consider the Intel Core 2 Duo E8400
- Around 15% higher clock speed: 3 GHz vs 2.
60 GHz - Around 50% more L2 cache; more data can be stored in the L2 cache for quick access later
- Around 19% better performance in PassMark — Single thread mark: 1235 vs 1037
- Around 9% better performance in Geekbench 4 — Single Core: 422 vs 388
- Around 9% better performance in Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core: 738 vs 680
| Maximum frequency | 3 GHz vs 2.60 GHz |
| L2 cache | 6144 KB vs 4 MB |
| PassMark — Single thread mark | 1235 vs 1037 |
| Geekbench 4 — Single Core | 422 vs 388 |
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core | 738 vs 680 |
Compare benchmarks
CPU 1: Intel Celeron N4000
CPU 2: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400
| PassMark — Single thread mark |
|
|
||
| PassMark — CPU mark |
|
|
||
| Geekbench 4 — Single Core |
|
|
||
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core |
|
|
| Name | Intel Celeron N4000 | Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 |
|---|---|---|
| PassMark — Single thread mark | 1037 | 1235 |
| PassMark — CPU mark | 1419 | 1174 |
| Geekbench 4 — Single Core | 388 | 422 |
| Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core | 680 | 738 |
GFXBench 4. 0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) |
583 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames) | 1322 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames) | 1853 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) | 583 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps) | 1322 | |
| GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps) | 1853 | |
| 3DMark Fire Strike — Physics Score | 2400 | |
CompuBench 1. 5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s) |
0.33 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) | 26.311 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) | 0.099 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) | 0.68 | |
| CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) | 2.408 |
Compare specifications (specs)
| Intel Celeron N4000 | Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 | |
|---|---|---|
| Architecture codename | Gemini Lake | Wolfdale |
| Launch date | 11 December 2017 | January 2008 |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $107 | |
| Place in performance rating | 1979 | 2639 |
| Processor Number | N4000 | E8400 |
| Series | Intel® Celeron® Processor N Series | Legacy Intel® Core™ Processors |
| Status | Launched | Discontinued |
| Vertical segment | Mobile | Desktop |
| Price now | $129. 95 |
|
| Value for money (0-100) | 4.87 | |
| 64 bit support | ||
| Base frequency | 1.10 GHz | 3.00 GHz |
| L2 cache | 4 MB | 6144 KB |
| Manufacturing process technology | 14 nm | 45 nm |
| Maximum core temperature | 105 °C | 72.4°C |
| Maximum frequency | 2. 60 GHz |
3 GHz |
| Number of cores | 2 | 2 |
| Number of threads | 2 | |
| Bus Speed | 1333 MHz FSB | |
| Die size | 107 mm2 | |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 72 °C | |
| Transistor count | 410 million | |
| VID voltage range | 0. 8500V-1.3625V |
|
| Max memory channels | 2 | |
| Maximum memory size | 8 GB | |
| Supported memory types | DDR4/LPDDR4 upto 2400 MT/s | DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 |
| Device ID | 0x3185 | |
| Execution Units | 12 | |
| Graphics base frequency | 200 MHz | |
| Graphics max dynamic frequency | 650 MHz | |
| Max video memory | 8 GB | |
| Processor graphics | Intel® UHD Graphics 600 | |
| DisplayPort | ||
| eDP | ||
| HDMI | ||
| MIPI-DSI | ||
| Number of displays supported | 3 | |
| 4K resolution support | ||
| DirectX | 12 | |
| OpenGL | 4. 4 |
|
| Low Halogen Options Available | ||
| Max number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Package Size | 25mm x 24mm | 37.5mm x 37.5mm |
| Scenario Design Power (SDP) | 4.8 W | |
| Sockets supported | FCBGA1090 | LGA775 |
| Thermal Design Power (TDP) | 6 Watt | 65 Watt |
| Thermal Solution | 105 deg C | |
| Integrated LAN | ||
| Integrated Wireless | Intel® Wireless-AC MAC | |
| Max number of PCIe lanes | 6 | |
| Max number of SATA 6 Gb/s Ports | 2 | |
| Number of USB ports | 8 | |
| PCI Express revision | 2. 0 |
|
| PCIe configurations | 1×4 + 1×2 or 4×1 or 2×1+1×2 + 1×2 | |
| Total number of SATA ports | 2 | |
| UART | ||
| USB revision | 2.0/3.0 | |
| Anti-Theft technology | ||
| Execute Disable Bit (EDB) | ||
| Intel® Identity Protection technology | ||
| Intel® Memory Protection Extensions (Intel® MPX) | ||
| Intel® OS Guard | ||
| Intel® Secure Key technology | ||
| Intel® Software Guard Extensions (Intel® SGX) | ||
| Intel® Trusted Execution technology (TXT) | ||
| Enhanced Intel SpeedStep® technology | ||
| General-Purpose Input/Output (GPIO) | ||
| Idle States | ||
| Intel 64 | ||
| Intel® AES New Instructions | ||
| Intel® Hyper-Threading technology | ||
| Intel® Optane™ Memory Supported | ||
| Intel® Smart Response technology | ||
| Intel® Turbo Boost technology | ||
| Intel® vPro™ Platform Eligibility | ||
| Speed Shift technology | ||
| Thermal Monitoring | ||
| FSB parity | ||
| Intel® Demand Based Switching | ||
| Intel® Virtualization Technology (VT-x) | ||
| Intel® Virtualization Technology for Directed I/O (VT-d) | ||
| Intel® VT-x with Extended Page Tables (EPT) |
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 vs Intel Celeron G6900: comparison
Intel Celeron G6900
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400
VS
Intel Celeron G6900
Rating: 2 points
WINNER
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400
Rating: 3 points
Technology
Performance
Memory specification
3
Main features
Interfaces and communications
0003
Top specifications and features
- Heat dissipation (TDP)
- Technological process
- Number of Cores
- CPU base clock
- Number of threads
Thermal Dissipation (TDP)
Intel Celeron G6900: 46 W
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400: 65 W
Process
Intel Celeron G6900: 7 nm
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400: 45 nm
Number of cores
Intel Celeron G6900: 2
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400: 2
Base clock speed
Intel Celeron G6900: 3.
4 GHz
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400: 3 GHz
Number of Threads
Intel Celeron G6900: 2
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400:
Description
The Intel Celeron G6900 processor runs at 3.4 Hz, the second Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 runs at 3 Hz. Intel Celeron G6900 is capable of accelerating to N/A Hz and the second to N/A Hz. The maximum power consumption of the first processor is 46W, while the Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 has 65W.
Regarding the architecture, the Intel Celeron G6900 is based on 7nm technology. Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 on 45 nm architecture.
Regarding processor memory. Intel Celeron G6900 can support DDR5. The maximum supported volume is 128 MB. It should be noted that the maximum memory bandwidth is 76.8. The second processor Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 is capable of supporting DDR No data. Throughput is No data. And the maximum amount of supported RAM is No data MB. nine0003
Graphics.
The Intel Celeron G6900 has an UHD Intel 710 graphics core. Its frequency is — 300 MHz. Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 received a video core No data. Here the frequency is No data MHz.
How processors perform in benchmarks. In the PassMark benchmark, the Intel Celeron G6900 scored No data. And the Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 scored 1083 points.
Why Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 is better than Intel Celeron G6900
- Thermal Dissipation (TDP) 46 W vs 65 W, -29 less0013
The more threads, the higher the performance of the processor, and it will be able to perform several tasks at the same time.
Show all2
max 256
Average: 10.7
max 256
Average: 10.7
L2 Cache Size
L2 cache with large scratchpad memory to increase processor speed and overall system performance.
Show all2.5MB
max 512
Average: 4.5 MB
6MB
max 512
Average: 4.5 MB
Number of cores
2
max 72
Mean: 5.8
2
max 72
Mean: 5.8
Processor base clock speed
3.4GHz
max 4.7
Average: 2.5 GHz
3 GHz
max 4.7
Average: 2.5 GHz
Max. number of PCI Express lanes
20
max 64
Average: 22.
7
max 64
Average: 22.7
PCI Express Configurations
Up to 1×16+4. 2×8+4
N/A
Idle states
is
is
Turbo Boost Max 3.0
No data
Graphic system
UHD Intel 710
maks no data no data. graphics system frequency
1.3GHz
max 1.55
Average: 1.1 GHz
GHz
max 1.55
Average: 1.1 GHz
nine0003Max. number of processors in configuration
1
Mean: 1.3
Mean: 1.3
DDR version
5
Mean: 3.
5
Mean: 3.5
Max. memory bandwidth
This is the speed at which the device stores or reads information.
76.8GB/s
max 352
Average: 41.4 GB/s
nine0003GB/s
max 352
Average: 41.4 GB/s
Max. number of memory channels
The greater their number, the higher the data transfer rate from memory to processor
2
max 16
Mean: 2.9
max 16
Mean: 2.9
Max. memory capacity
Largest RAM memory capacity.
128GB
nine0003max 6000
Average: 404.4 GB
GB
max 6000
Average: 404.4 GB
Max. Resolution (DP)
7680 x 4320 @ 60hz
No data
Enhanced Speedstep (EIST)
is
is
Opencl
022
4.5
max 4.6
Average: 4.1
nine0003max 4.6
Average: 4.1
Hyper-Threading Technology
Many Intel processors use state-of-the-art hyper-threading technology. Thus, each processor core works simultaneously on two threads, which significantly increases performance. Most processors work on the principle: one thread per core, therefore, their performance is lower.
Show allN/A
N/A
AVX
AVX allows you to increase the speed of calculations in multimedia, financial and scientific applications, and it also improves the performance of Linux RAID.
Full textYes
No data
Version sse
Allows you to speed up multimedia tasks (such as volume control). Each subsequent version has a number of improvements
Show all4.2
nine00037 nm
Average: 36.8 nm
45 nm
Average: 36.8 nm
Heat dissipation (TDP)
Heat dissipation requirement (TDP) is the maximum amount of energy that can be dissipated by the cooling system. The lower the TDP, the less power will be consumed.
Show all46W
Average: 67.6W
65W
Average: 67.6W
No data
Building
45.0 mm x 37.5 mm
37.5mm x 37.5mm
ED The device
0x4693
9000 9000 GPUs GPUs GPUs GPUs 9001 ) is characterized by a high clock frequency.
300MHz
max 2400
Average: 535.8 MHz
MHz
max 2400
Average: 535.8 MHz
Supports 64-bit system
A 64-bit system can support more than 4 GB of RAM, unlike a 32-bit system. This increases productivity. It also allows you to run 64-bit applications.
Full textYes
Yes
DirectX
Used in demanding games providing improved graphics
12
max 12.1
Average: 12
max 12.1
Average: 12
Maximum processor temperature
A reset may occur if the maximum temperature at which the processor operates is exceeded.
Show all100°C
max 110
Average value: 96 °C
°C
max 110
Average: 96°C
Monitor support
Multiple monitors can be connected to the device, making it easier to work by increasing the working space.
Show all4
Mean: 2.9
Mean: 2.9
Codename
Alder Lake
Wolfdale
Purpose
Desktop
Desktop
FAQ
Can Intel Celeron G6900 and Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 work in 4K mode?
Intel Celeron G6900 — Not available. Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 — Not available.
How many PCIe lanes
Intel Celeron G6900 — 20. Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 — Not available.
How much RAM is supported?
Intel Celeron G6900 supports 128 GB. Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 supports N/AGB.
How fast are the processors?
Intel Celeron G6900 operates at 3.4 GHz. nine0003
How many cores does the processor have?
Intel Celeron G6900 has 2 cores. Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 has 2 cores.
Do the processors support ECC memory?
Intel Celeron G6900 — Not available.
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 — Not available. Does the Intel Celeron G6900 have integrated graphics?
Intel Celeron G6900 — UHD Intel 710. Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 — n.a. Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 supports DDR No data available. nine0003
What is the socket of the processors?
FCLGA1700 is used to install the Intel Celeron G6900. To install the Intel Core 2 Duo E8400, LGA775 is used.
What architecture is used?
The Intel Celeron G6900 is based on the Alder Lake architecture. The Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 is based on the Wolfdale architecture.
Is the multiplier unlocked on the Intel Celeron G6900 processor?
Intel Celeron G6900 — Not available. Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 — Not available.
How do processors perform in benchmarks?
The Intel Celeron G6900 scored No data points according to PassMark. Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 scored 1083 points.
What is the maximum frequency of the processors?
The maximum frequency of the Intel Celeron G6900 reaches No data Hz.
The maximum frequency of the Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 reaches No data Hz. How much energy do they consume?
The power consumption of the Intel Celeron G6900 can be up to 46 watts. The Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 has up to 46 watts. nine0003
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400
VS
Intel Celeron G6900
Intel Pentium G645T
VS
Intel Celeron G6900
Intel Core 2 Duo T9800
VS
Intel Celeron G6900
Intel Core i3-380M
VS
Intel Celeron G6900
Intel Core 2 Duo E7600
VS
Intel Celeron G6900
Intel Pentium E5800
VS
Intel Celeron G6900
AMD Athlon II X2 255
nine0003
VSIntel Celeron G6900
AMD Athlon II X2 250e
VS
Intel Celeron G6900
Intel Pentium E6700
VS
Intel Celeron G6900
AMD A6-3410MX
VS
Intel Celeron G6900
AMD Phenom II X2 B55
VS
Intel Celeron G6900
Intel Celeron N3160
VS
Intel Celeron G6900
Intel Pentium Dual Core T4200
VS
Intel Celeron G6900
nine0003Intel Pentium 3805U
VS
Intel Celeron G6900
Intel Pentium 977
VS
Intel Celeron G6900
Intel Celeron 3215U
VS
Intel Celeron G6900
AMD A6-5350M
VS
Intel Celeron G6900
AMD Phenom X3 8850
VS
Intel Celeron G6900
Intel Pentium N3520
VS
Intel Celeron G6900
Intel Pentium G640T
VS
Intel Celeron G6900
Comparison of Intel Celeron N4000 and Intel Core 2 Duo E8400
Comparative analysis of the Intel Celeron N4000 and Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 processors by all known characteristics in the categories: General information, Performance, Memory, Graphics, Graphical interfaces, Picture quality in graphics, Graphics API support, Compatibility, Peripherals, Security and reliability, Technology , Virtualization.
Analysis of processor performance by benchmarks: PassMark — Single thread mark, PassMark — CPU mark, Geekbench 4 — Single Core, Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core, GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames), GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps), GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps), 3DMark Fire Strike — Physics Score, 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).
nine0003Intel Celeron N4000
versus
Intel Core 2 Duo E8400
Benefits
Reasons to choose Intel Celeron N4000
- Newer processor, release dates difference 9 year(s) 14 month(s) approx
: 105 °C vs 72.
4°C - Newer process technology to make the processor more powerful but with lower power consumption: 14 nm vs 45 nm
- 10.8 times lower power consumption: 6 Watt vs 65 Watt
- About 21% more performance in PassMark — CPU mark benchmark: 1419 vs 1174
Release date 11 December 2017 vs January 2008 Maximum core temperature 105°C vs 72.4°C Technological process 14 nm vs 45 nm Power consumption (TDP) 6 Watt vs 65 Watt PassMark — CPU mark 1419 vs 1174 Reasons to choose Intel Core 2 Duo E8400
- About 15% more clock speed: 3 GHz vs 2.
60 GHz - L2 cache is about 50% larger, which means more data can be stored in it for quick access
- Performance in PassMark — Single thread mark benchmark is about 19% higher: 1235 vs 1037
- Performance in Geekbench 4 — Single Core benchmark is approx. 9% more: 422 vs 388
- About 9% more performance in Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core benchmark: 738 vs 680
Max frequency nine0950 3 GHz vs 2.60 GHz
Level 2 cache 6144 KB vs 4 MB PassMark — Single thread mark 1235 vs 1037 Geekbench 4 — Single Core 422 vs 388 Geekbench 4 — Multi Core 738 vs 680 Benchmark comparison
CPU 1: Intel Celeron N4000
CPU 2: Intel Core 2 Duo E8400PassMark — Single thread mark CPU 1 CPU 2 PassMark — CPU mark CPU 1 CPU 2 nine0951
Geekbench 4 — Single Core CPU 1 CPU 2 Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core nine0947 CPU 1 CPU 2 Name Intel Celeron N4000 Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 PassMark — Single thread mark 1037 1235 PassMark — CPU mark 1419 1174 Geekbench 4 — Single Core 388 422 Geekbench 4 — Multi-Core 680 738 GFXBench 4. 
0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Frames) 583 GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Frames) 1322 GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Frames) 1853 GFXBench 4.0 — Car Chase Offscreen (Fps) 583 GFXBench 4.0 — Manhattan (Fps) 1322 GFXBench 4.0 — T-Rex (Fps) 1853 3DMark Fire Strike — Physics Score 2400 CompuBench 1. 
5 Desktop — Face Detection (mPixels/s) 0.33 CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Ocean Surface Simulation (Frames/s) 26.311 CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — T-Rex (Frames/s) 0.099 CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Video Composition (Frames/s) 0.68 CompuBench 1.5 Desktop — Bitcoin Mining (mHash/s) 2.408 Feature comparison
Intel Celeron N4000 Intel Core 2 Duo E8400 Architecture name nine0950 Gemini Lake
Wolfdale Issue date December 11, 2017 January 2008 Price at first issue date $107 Place in the rating nine0950 1979
2639 Processor Number N4000 E8400 Series Intel® Celeron® Processor N Series Legacy Intel® Core™ Processors Status nine0950 Launched
Discontinued Applicability Mobile Desktop Price now $129. 
95 Price/performance ratio (0-100) nine1172
4.87 Support 64 bit Base frequency 1.10 GHz 3.00 GHz Level 2 cache 4MB 6144KB Process 14nm 45nm Maximum core temperature 105 °C 72.4°C Maximum frequency nine0950 2.60 GHz
3GHz Number of cores 2 2 Number of threads 2 Bus Speed nine0950 1333 MHz FSB Crystal area 107 mm2 Level 1 cache 128KB Maximum case temperature (TCase) nine0950 72 °C Number of transistors 410 million Permissible core voltage 0. 
8500V-1.3625V Maximum number of memory channels 2 nine1172
Maximum memory size 8GB Supported memory types DDR4/LPDDR4 upto 2400MT/s DDR1, DDR2, DDR3 Device ID 0x3185 nine1172
Number of execution units 12 Graphics base frequency 200MHz Graphics max dynamic frequency 650MHz nine1172
Video memory size 8GB Integrated graphics Intel® UHD Graphics 600 DisplayPort nine0954 eDP HDMI MIPI-DSI Maximum number of monitors supported 3 4K support DirectX 12 OpenGL 4. 
4 nine1172
Low Halogen Options Available Maximum number of processors in configuration
1 1 Package Size 25mm x 24mm 37.5mm x 37.5mm Scenario Design Power (SDP) 4.8W Supported sockets FCBGA1090 LGA775 Power consumption (TDP) nine0950 6 Watt
65 Watt Thermal Solution 105 deg C Integrated LAN Integrated Wireless Intel® Wireless-AC MAC Number of PCI Express lanes 6 Maximum number of SATA 6 Gb/s ports 2 Number of USB ports 8 PCI Express revision 2. 
- Newer processor, release dates difference 9 year(s) 14 month(s) approx