CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of T2400 vs 240 among all 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

Sky Diver and Cloud Gate

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?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?

Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

6.9

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Core Duo T2400 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core Duo T2400  based on its performance and single-core 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

Intel Core Duo T2400

CPUBoss Winner
Front view of Intel Core Duo T2400

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core Duo T2400

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core Duo T2400

Report a correction
Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score 73,900 MB/s vs 45,800 MB/s More than 60% better geekbench 3 AES single core score
Significantly more l2 cache 2 MB vs 1 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Higher clock speed 1.83 GHz vs 1.5 GHz More than 20% higher clock speed
Better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score 1,403 vs 513 Around 2.8x better geekbench 3 Multi-Core score
More cores 2 vs 1 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Front view of AMD E 240

Reasons to consider the
AMD E 240

Report a correction
Much newer manufacturing process 40 nm vs 65 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Newer Jan, 2011 vs Jan, 2006 Release date over 5 years later
Lower typical power consumption 14.63W vs 25.19W More than 40% lower typical power consumption
Lower annual home energy cost 4.34 $/year vs 7.47 $/year More than 40% lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 15.77 $/year vs 27.16 $/year More than 40% lower annual commercial energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core Duo T2400 vs E 240

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

E 240
513

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core Duo T2400
73,900 MB/s
E 240
45,800 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

E 240
508

GeekBench

E 240
929

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core Duo T2400  vs
E 240 
Clock speed 1.83 GHz 1.5 GHz
Cores Dual core Single core
Socket type
479
940

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
MMX
SSE3
SSE
AMD64
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

details

Core Duo T2400  vs
E 240 
Threads 2 1
L2 cache 2 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 65 nm 40 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 11 5
Voltage range 1.16 - 1.3V 1.18 - 1.35V

integrated graphics

GPU None GPU
Label N/A Radeon™ HD 6310
Latest DirectX N/A 11.0
GPU clock speed N/A 500 MHz
Turbo clock speed N/A 500 MHz

power consumption

TDP 31W 18W
Annual home energy cost 7.47 $/year 4.34 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 27.16 $/year 15.77 $/year
Performance per watt 2.06 pt/W 1.81 pt/W
Typical power consumption 25.19W 14.63W
Intel Core Duo T2400
Report a correction
AMD E 240
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus