CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E6400 vs 3220 among desktop CPUs (45 to 75W)

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores
Core2 Duo E6400
3.5
Core i3 3220
8.3
Core2 Duo E8400
4.9
PCMark 8 Home 3.0 Accelerated, PassMark and 1 more

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance
Core2 Duo E6400
3.4
Core i3 3220
6.9
Core2 Duo E8400
4.3
PassMark (Single Core), Geekbench 3 Single Core and 1 more

Integrated Graphics

Integrated GPU performance for graphics
Core2 Duo E6400
n.d.
Core i3 3220
n.d.
Core2 Duo E8400
n.d.
Fire Strike

Integrated Graphics (OpenCL)

Integrated GPU performance for parallel computing
Core2 Duo E6400
0.0
Core i3 3220
0.0
Core2 Duo E8400
0.0
CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 4 more

Performance per Watt

How efficiently does the processor use electricity?
Core2 Duo E6400
3.1
Core i3 3220
5.7
Core2 Duo E8400
3.6
Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more

Value

Are you paying a premium for performance?
Core2 Duo E6400
n.d.
Core i3 3220
n.d.
Core2 Duo E8400
n.d.
Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more
5.3

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets
Core2 Duo E6400
2.6
Core i3 3220
5.3
Core2 Duo E8400
3.3

Winner
Intel Core i3 3220 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i3 3220  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

Intel Core2 Duo E6400

Front view of Intel Core2 Duo E6400
Front view of Intel Core i3 3220

Intel Core i3 3220

Join the discussion

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core2 Duo E6400

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core2 Duo E6400

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 2 MB vs 0.5 MB 4x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 4x more l2 cache per core
Front view of Intel Core i3 3220

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i3 3220

Report a correction
Much higher clock speed 3.3 GHz vs 2.13 GHz Around 55% higher clock speed
Much newer manufacturing process 22 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
Much better PassMark score 4,229 vs 1,295 More than 3.2x better PassMark score
Much better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score 5,351 vs 1,961 Around 2.8x better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score
More threads 4 vs 2 Twice as many threads
Significantly higher Maximum operating temperature 65.3 °C vs 61.4 °C More than 5% higher Maximum operating temperature
Lower typical power consumption 44.69W vs 52.81W More than 15% lower typical power consumption
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.43 GHz vs 3.33 GHz Around 5% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Newer Sep, 2012 vs Jul, 2006 Release date over 6 years later
Lower annual home energy cost 13.25 $/year vs 15.66 $/year More than 15% lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 48.18 $/year vs 56.94 $/year More than 15% lower annual commercial energy cost
Better overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.46 GHz vs 3.33 GHz Around 5% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Duo E6400 vs Core i3 3220

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core2 Duo E6400
2,071
Core i3 3220
5,399

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core2 Duo E6400
1,133
Core i3 3220
2,501

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core2 Duo E6400
91,000 MB/s
Core i3 3220
173,000 MB/s

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core2 Duo E6400
1,961
Core i3 3220
5,351

GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core2 Duo E6400
2,126
Core i3 3220
5,707

GeekBench

Core2 Duo E6400
3,267
Core i3 3220
8,919

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

Core2 Duo E6400
1,295
Core i3 3220
4,229

PassMark (Single Core)

Core2 Duo E6400
801
Core i3 3220
1,764

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

 Core2 Duo E6400  vs
Core i3 3220 
Clock speed 2.13 GHz 3.3 GHz
Cores Dual core Dual core
Socket type
LGA 775
LGA 1155

features
Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No No
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE4
AVX
SSE3
SSE
SSE4.1
SSE4.2
Supplemental SSE3
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption
TDP 65W 55W
Annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year 13.25 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year 48.18 $/year
Performance per watt 1.35 pt/W 2.69 pt/W
Typical power consumption 52.81W 44.69W

details

 Core2 Duo E6400  vs
Core i3 3220 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 2 4
L2 cache 2 MB 0.5 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
Manufacture process 65 nm 22 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 8 33
Operating temperature Unknown - 61.4°C Unknown - 65.3°C

overclocking
Overclock popularity 15 50
Overclocked clock speed 3.33 GHz 3.43 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 3.33 GHz 3.46 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 3.33 GHz 3.43 GHz

integrated graphics
GPU None GPU
Label N/A Intel® HD Graphics 2500
Number of displays supported N/A 3
GPU clock speed N/A 650 MHz
Turbo clock speed N/A 1,050 MHz

bus
Architecture FSB DMI
Number of links 1 1
Intel Core2 Duo E6400
Report a correction
Intel Core i3 3220
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus

features

information

  • terms and privacy
  • about
  • blog

on the web

CPUBoss