0 Comments
| Intel Core2 Duo E8400 vs AMD Phenom X3 8600 |
Released January, 2008
Intel Core2 Duo E8400
- 3 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Intel Core2 Duo E8400
![]() | Much higher clock speed 3 GHz | ![]() | Much better PassMark (Single core) score 1,251 |
![]() | Much newer manufacturing process 45 nm | ![]() | Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.22 GHz |
VS
Released March, 2008
AMD Phenom X3 8600
- 2.3 GHz
- Tri core
Reasons to buy the AMD Phenom X3 8600
![]() | More cores 3 | ![]() | More threads 3 |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
Much higher clock speed | 3 GHz | vs | 2.3 GHz | More than 30% higher clock speed | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Much better PassMark (Single core) score | 1,251 | vs | 769 | Around 65% better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
Much newer manufacturing process | 45 nm | vs | 65 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.22 GHz | vs | 2.71 GHz | More than 55% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
Much better performance per watt | 1.83 pt/W | vs | 0.82 pt/W | Around 2.2x better performance per watt | |||
Much lower typical power consumption | 52.81W | vs | 77.19W | More than 30% lower typical power consumption | |||
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.23 GHz | vs | 2.3 GHz | Around 85% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
Higher Maximum operating temperature | 72.4 °C | vs | 70 °C | Around 5% higher Maximum operating temperature | |||
Significantly lower annual home energy cost | 15.66 $/year | vs | 22.89 $/year | More than 30% lower annual home energy cost | |||
Significantly lower annual commercial energy cost | 56.94 $/year | vs | 83.22 $/year | More than 30% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
| |||||||
More cores | 3 | vs | 2 | 1 more cores; run more applications at once | |||
More threads | 3 | vs | 2 | 1 more threads |
Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Duo E8400 vs Phenom X3 8600
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Duo E8400
2,826
Phenom X3 8600
3,244
GeekBench
Core2 Duo E8400
4,794
Phenom X3 8600
3,244
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
Core2 Duo E8400
2,160
Phenom X3 8600
1,697
PassMark (Single Core)
Core2 Duo E8400
1,251
Phenom X3 8600
769
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Core2 Duo E8400 | vs | Phenom X3 8600 |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 3 GHz | 2.3 GHz | |
Cores | Dual core | Tri core | |
Socket type | |||
LGA 775 | |||
AM2+ | |||
features | |||
Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
Instruction set extensions | |||
SSE4a | |||
SSE2 | |||
MMX | |||
SSE3 | |||
SSE | |||
SSE4.1 | |||
3DNow! | |||
Supplemental SSE3 | |||
Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
power consumption | |||
TDP | 65W | 95W | |
Annual home energy cost | 15.66 $/year | 22.89 $/year | |
Annual commercial energy cost | 56.94 $/year | 83.22 $/year | |
Performance per watt | 1.83 pt/W | 0.82 pt/W | |
Typical power consumption | 52.81W | 77.19W |
details | Core2 Duo E8400 | vs | Phenom X3 8600 |
---|---|---|---|
Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
Threads | 2 | 3 | |
L2 cache | 6 MB | 2 MB | |
L2 cache per core | 3 MB/core | 0.67 MB/core | |
Manufacture process | 45 nm | 65 nm | |
Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
Operating temperature | Unknown - 72.4°C | Unknown - 70°C | |
overclocking | |||
Overclocked clock speed | 4.22 GHz | 2.71 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.23 GHz | 2.3 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.22 GHz | 2.71 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 | |||
Clock speed | 1,333 MHz | 1,800 MHz |
Intel Core2 Duo E8400 ![]() | AMD Phenom X3 8600 ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | ||
E8400 vs Q6600 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $125 | |
E8400 vs 3220 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $125 | |
E8400 vs E7500 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $179 | |
E8400 vs Q8400 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $64 | |
E8400 vs E5700 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $200 | |
E8400 vs E8500 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $200 | |
E8400 vs Q9400 | ||
Popular Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$305 | $300 | |
W3520 vs 2500 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$272 | $350 | |
4790K vs 6700K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
4200U vs 6410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$275 | $161 | |
4005U vs N3540 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$248 | $230 | |
4770K vs 9590 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$250 | $350 | |
6600K vs 6700K | ||