0 Comments
| Intel Core2 Duo E8400 vs Celeron M 380 |
Released January, 2008
Intel Core2 Duo E8400
- 3 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Intel Core2 Duo E8400
![]() | Much more l2 cache 6 MB | ![]() | Much newer manufacturing process 45 nm |
![]() | Much higher clock speed 3 GHz | ![]() | More advanced architecture x86-64 |
VS
First seen on June, 2012
Intel Celeron M 380
- 1.6 GHz
- Single core
Reasons to buy the Celeron M 380
![]() | Much lower typical power consumption 17.06W | ![]() | Much lower annual home energy cost 5.06 $/year |
![]() | Much lower annual commercial energy cost 18.4 $/year |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
Much more l2 cache | 6 MB | vs | 1 MB | 6x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Much newer manufacturing process | 45 nm | vs | 90 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
Much higher clock speed | 3 GHz | vs | 1.6 GHz | More than 85% higher clock speed | |||
More advanced architecture | x86-64 | vs | x86 | A 64-bit architecture allows more RAM to be installed and accessed by the processor | |||
Much more l2 cache per core | 3 MB/core | vs | 1 MB/core | 3x more l2 cache per core | |||
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 | |||
Has virtualization support | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Boosts performance of virtual machines | |||
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.22 GHz | vs | 2.13 GHz | Around 2x better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
Supports trusted computing | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing | |||
Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.23 GHz | vs | 1.6 GHz | Around 2.8x better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
More cores | 2 | vs | 1 | Twice as many cores; run more applications at once | |||
| |||||||
Much lower typical power consumption | 17.06W | vs | 52.81W | 3.1x lower typical power consumption | |||
Much lower annual home energy cost | 5.06 $/year | vs | 15.66 $/year | 3.1x lower annual home energy cost | |||
Much lower annual commercial energy cost | 18.4 $/year | vs | 56.94 $/year | 3.1x lower annual commercial energy cost |
Features Key features of the Core2 Duo E8400 vs Celeron M 380
clock speed
Core2 Duo E8400
3 GHz
Celeron M 380
1.6 GHz
L2 cache
Core2 Duo E8400
6 MB
Celeron M 380
1 MB
overclocked clock speed (air)
Core2 Duo E8400
4.22 GHz
Celeron M 380
2.13 GHz
overclocked clock speed (water)
Core2 Duo E8400
4.23 GHz
Celeron M 380
1.6 GHz
TDP
Core2 Duo E8400
65W
Celeron M 380
21W
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Core2 Duo E8400 | vs | Celeron M 380 |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 3 GHz | 1.6 GHz | |
Cores | Dual core | Single core | |
Socket type | |||
LGA 775 | |||
479 | |||
features | |||
Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
Supports trusted computing | Yes | No | |
Has virtualization support | Yes | No | |
Instruction set extensions | |||
SSE2 | |||
MMX | |||
SSE3 | |||
SSE | |||
SSE4.1 | |||
Supplemental SSE3 | |||
Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | No | |
power consumption | |||
TDP | 65W | 21W | |
Annual home energy cost | 15.66 $/year | 5.06 $/year | |
Annual commercial energy cost | 56.94 $/year | 18.4 $/year | |
Typical power consumption | 52.81W | 17.06W | |
bus | |||
Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
Clock speed | 1,333 MHz | 400 MHz |
details | Core2 Duo E8400 | vs | Celeron M 380 |
---|---|---|---|
Architecture | x86-64 | x86 | |
Threads | 2 | 1 | |
L2 cache | 6 MB | 1 MB | |
L2 cache per core | 3 MB/core | 1 MB/core | |
Manufacture process | 45 nm | 90 nm | |
Transistor count | 410,000,000 | 144,000,000 | |
Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
Clock multiplier | 9 | 16 | |
Voltage range | 0.85 - 1.36V | 1 - 1.29V | |
overclocking | |||
Overclocked clock speed | 4.22 GHz | 2.13 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.23 GHz | 1.6 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.22 GHz | 2.13 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 ![]() | Intel Celeron M 380 ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | ||
Intel Core2 Duo E8400 vs Quad Q6600 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $125 | |
Intel Core2 Duo E8400 vs Core i3 3220 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $125 | |
Intel Core2 Duo E8400 vs E7500 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $179 | |
Intel Core2 Duo E8400 vs Quad Q8400 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | ||
Intel Core2 Duo E8400 vs AMD Athlon II X2 250 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $64 | |
Intel Core2 Duo E8400 vs Pentium E5700 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $287 | |
Intel Core2 Duo E8400 vs Quad Q9550 | ||
Popular Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$305 | $300 | |
Intel Xeon W3520 vs Core i5 2500 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$272 | $350 | |
Intel Core i7 4790K vs 6700K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
Intel Core i5 4200U vs AMD A8 6410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
Intel Core i5 6200U vs AMD A9 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$275 | $161 | |
Intel Core i3 4005U vs Pentium N3540 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$180 | ||
Intel Core i5 3470 vs AMD A6 5200 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$134 | $225 | |
Intel Celeron 847 vs Core i3 3217U | ||