Winner
Intel Core i3 2120
CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core i3 2120 based on its .
See full details Intel Core2 Duo E8400 vs Core i3 2120 |
Released January, 2008
Intel Core2 Duo E8400
- 3 GHz
- Dual core
6.6 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Intel Core2 Duo E8400
 | Much more l2 cache 6 MB | | Much more l2 cache per core 3 MB/core |
| | Supports trusted computing Yes | | Higher Maximum Operating Temperature 72.4 °C |
by Anthony-GarreffaYour GPU setup is more than good enough to run Battlefield 3 at medium-to-high settings at 1920x1080, so I would suggest waiting and upgrading to an Ivy Bridge setup.
VS
Released January, 2011
Intel Core i3 2120
- 3.3 GHz
- Dual core
7.2 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Core i3 2120
| | Is hyperthreaded Yes | | Has a built-in GPU Yes |
| | Newer manufacturing process 32 nms | | Higher clock speed 3.3 GHz |
by Legit Reviews (Jul, 2011)Getting the base clock up to 104MHz was enough to boost the CPU core clock speed by nearly 130MHz and running the processor at 3.43GHz did bring a nice performance boost.
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E8400 vs 2120
Performance | |
Benchmark performance using all cores | |
| Passmark, GeekBench (32-bit) and GeekBench (64-bit) | |
Single-core Performance | |
Individual core benchmark performance | |
| Passmark (Single Core) | |
Overclocking | |
How much speed can you get out of the processor? | |
| overclock popularity | |
Value | |
Are you paying a premium for performance? | |
| Performance Per Dollar | |
CPUBoss Score | |
Performance, Single-core Performance, Overclocking and Value | |
 |
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
| |  | Intel Core i3 2120CPUBoss Winner |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much more l2 cache | 6 MB | vs | 0.5 MB | 12x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much more l2 cache per core | 3 MB/core | vs | 0.25 MB/core | 12x more l2 cache per core | |||
| Supports trusted computing | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing | |||
| Higher Maximum Operating Temperature | 72.4 °C | vs | 69.1 °C | Around 5% higher Maximum Operating Temperature | |||
| |||||||
| Is hyperthreaded | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Maximizes usage of each CPU core | |||
| Has a built-in GPU | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required | |||
| Newer manufacturing process | 32 nms | vs | 45 nms | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Higher clock speed | 3.3 GHz | vs | 3 GHz | Around 10% higher clock speed | |||
| Significantly better PassMark (Single core) score | 1,681 | vs | 1,258 | Around 35% better PassMark (Single core) score | |||
| More threads | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many threads | |||
| Significantly better performance per dollar | 4.88 pt/$ | vs | 2.24 pt/$ | Around 2.2x better performance per dollar | |||
| Better PassMark score | 3,871 | vs | 2,162 | Around 80% better PassMark score | |||
| Better 3DMark11 physics score | 3,880 | vs | 2,310 | Around 70% better 3DMark11 physics score | |||
| Better geekbench (64-bit) score | 5,640 | vs | 3,099 | More than 80% better geekbench (64-bit) score | |||
| Marginally newer | Jan, 2011 | vs | Jan, 2008 | Release date over 3 years later | |||
| Better performance per watt | 9.39 pt/W | vs | 6.17 pt/W | More than 50% better performance per watt | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Duo E8400 vs Core i3 2120
GeekBench (32-bit)
GeekBench (64-bit)
GeekBench
3D Mark 11 (Physics)
Core i3 2120 | by Legit Reviews (Jul, 2011)Benchmark Results: Futuremark 3DMark Vantage is GPU weighted, so the winner of the overall score part of the benchmark and the processor with the highest GPU score was the AMD A8-3850 A-Series APU.
Passmark
Core i3 2120 | by Legit Reviews (Jul, 2011)Overclocking the GPU up to 1250MHz from 1100MHz helped boost our 3DMark score from 1087 3DMarks to 1301 3DMarks!
Passmark (Single Core)
Reviews Word on the street
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Core2 Duo E8400 | vs | Core i3 2120 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 3 GHz | 3.3 GHz | |
| Cores | Dual core | Dual core | |
| Socket type | |||
| LGA 775 | |||
| LGA 1155 | |||
| Is hyperthreaded | No | Yes | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Supports trusted computing | Yes | No | |
| Has vitualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction-set-extensions | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE | |||
| SSE4.2 | |||
| AVX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| SSE4 | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
gpu | |||
| GPU | None | GPU | |
| Label | N/A | Intel® HD Graphics 2000 | |
| Number of displays supported | N/A | 2 | |
| GPU clock speed | N/A | 850 MHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | N/A | 1,100 MHz | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | FSB | DMI | |
| Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
details | Core2 Duo E8400 | vs | Core i3 2120 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 2 | 4 | |
| L2 cache | 6 MB | 0.5 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 3 MB/core | 0.25 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 45 nms | 32 nms | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock multiplier | 9 | 33 | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 72.4°C | Unknown - 69.1°C | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclock popularity | 125 | 22 | |
| Overclock review score | 4.5 | 1 | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 65W | 65W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 15.66 $/year | 15.66 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 56.94 $/year | 56.94 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 6.17 pt/W | 9.39 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 52.81W | 52.81W | |
 Intel Core2 Duo E8400  Report a correction |  Intel Core i3 2120 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $179 | $82 | |
| E8400 vs J1900 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $179 | $125 | |
| E8400 vs 3220 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $179 | ||
| E8400 vs Q6600 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $179 | $64 | |
| E8400 vs G2020 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $179 | $70 | |
| E8400 vs G3220 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $179 | $179 | |
| E8400 vs Q8400 | ||
 | VS | |
| $125 | $125 | |
| 2120 vs 3220 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $47 | $117 | |
| E3300 vs E4600 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $340 | ||
| 4770K vs 9590 | ||
 | VS | |
| $240 | $340 | |
| 4670K vs 4770K | ||
| | VS |  |
| $340 | $332 | |
| 4770K vs 4820k | ||
 | VS |  |
| $225 | $281 | |
| 3230M vs 4200U | ||
 | VS | |
| $200 | $240 | |
| 8350 vs 4670K | ||
| | VS |  |
| $281 | $393 | |
| 4200U vs 4500U | ||
