CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 450 vs E3400 among desktop CPUs

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics

Fire Strike

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing

CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?

Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

3.8

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Celeron E3400 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Celeron E3400  based on its performance.

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Celeron M 450

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron M 450

Report a correction
Much better PassMark score 2,120 vs 1,430 Around 50% better PassMark score
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Much lower typical power consumption 28.44W vs 52.81W More than 45% lower typical power consumption
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year vs 56.94 $/year More than 45% lower annual commercial energy cost
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year vs 15.66 $/year More than 45% lower annual home energy cost
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.12 GHz vs 2.6 GHz More than 20% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Celeron E3400

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron E3400

Report a correction
Much better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score 2,275 vs 983 More than 2.2x better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score
Much newer manufacturing process 45 nm vs 65 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Significantly higher clock speed 2.6 GHz vs 2.2 GHz Around 20% higher clock speed
More cores 2 vs 1 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
More threads 2 vs 1 Twice as many threads
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for maximum performance when needed, while conserving power and minimizing heat production when not needed
Much higher Maximum operating temperature 74.1 °C vs 60.4 °C Around 25% higher Maximum operating temperature
Has virtualization support Yes vs No Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.85 GHz vs 3.57 GHz Around 10% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Newer Jan, 2010 vs Aug, 2008 Release date over 1 years later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Celeron M 450 vs E3400

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Celeron M 450
92,100 MB/s
Celeron E3400
110,600 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Celeron M 450  vs
E3400 
Clock speed 2.2 GHz 2.6 GHz
Cores Single core Dual core
Socket type
478
LGA 775
Slot 1
M

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No No
Has virtualization support No Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE3
SSE
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling No Yes

power consumption

TDP 35W 65W
Annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year 15.66 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 30.66 $/year 56.94 $/year
Performance per watt 2.63 pt/W 1.64 pt/W
Typical power consumption 28.44W 52.81W

details

Celeron M 450  vs
E3400 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 1 2
L2 cache 1 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 65 nm 45 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 11 13
Voltage range 1 - 1.34V 0.85 - 1.36V
Operating temperature Unknown - 60.4°C Unknown - 74.1°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 3.57 GHz 3.85 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.12 GHz 2.6 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.57 GHz 3.85 GHz

integrated graphics

GPU None None
Label N/A N/A
Latest DirectX N/A N/A
Number of displays supported N/A N/A
GPU clock speed N/A N/A
Turbo clock speed N/A N/A
3DMark06 N/A N/A

bus

Architecture FSB FSB
Number of links 1 1
Clock speed 800 MHz 800 MHz
Intel Celeron M 450
Report a correction
Intel Celeron E3400
Report a correction

Comments

Showing 1 comment.
What! How could the celeron450 be better than a e3400? I've tried both, and 450 simply doesn't even achieve the same performance as 3400.
comments powered by Disqus