CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E8400 vs 210U 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

No winner declared

Too close to call

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 Core2 Duo E8400

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core2 Duo E8400

Report a correction
Much more l2 cache 6 MB vs 0.25 MB 24x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Much higher clock speed 3 GHz vs 1.5 GHz 2x higher clock speed
Much newer manufacturing process 45 nm vs 65 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Much more l2 cache per core 3 MB/core vs 0.25 MB/core 12x more l2 cache per core
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.22 GHz vs 1.8 GHz More than 2.2x better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score 1,251 vs 445 More than 2.8x better PassMark (Single core) score
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.23 GHz vs 1.5 GHz More than 2.8x better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Better PassMark score 2,160 vs 382 Around 5.8x better PassMark score
More cores 2 vs 1 Twice as many cores; run more applications at once
Front view of AMD Sempron 210U

Reasons to consider the
AMD Sempron 210U

Report a correction
Much lower typical power consumption 12.19W vs 52.81W 4.3x lower typical power consumption
Much lower annual home energy cost 3.61 $/year vs 15.66 $/year 4.3x lower annual home energy cost
Much lower annual commercial energy cost 13.14 $/year vs 56.94 $/year 4.3x lower annual commercial energy cost
Newer Jan, 2009 vs Jan, 2008 Release date over 1 years later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Duo E8400 vs Sempron 210U

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

Core2 Duo E8400
128,000 MB/s
Sempron 210U
29.7 MB/s

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core2 Duo E8400  vs
Sempron 210U 
Clock speed 3 GHz 1.5 GHz
Cores Dual core Single core

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE2
MMX
SSE3
SSE
SSE4.1
3DNow!
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 65W 15W
Annual home energy cost 15.66 $/year 3.61 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 56.94 $/year 13.14 $/year
Performance per watt 1.83 pt/W 1.5 pt/W
Typical power consumption 52.81W 12.19W

details

Core2 Duo E8400  vs
Sempron 210U 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 2 1
L2 cache 6 MB 0.25 MB
L2 cache per core 3 MB/core 0.25 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nm 65 nm
Max CPUs 1 1

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 4.22 GHz 1.8 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.23 GHz 1.5 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.22 GHz 1.8 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
Intel Core2 Duo E8400
Report a correction
AMD Sempron 210U
Report a correction

Read more

Comments

comments powered by Disqus