Winner
Intel Core2 Duo E8400
CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core2 Duo E8400 based on its .
See full details Intel Core2 Duo E8400 vs Core i3 3220 |
Released January, 2008
Intel Core2 Duo E8400
- 3 GHz
- Dual core
3.3 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 |
| | Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.22 GHz | | Supports trusted computing Yes |
VS
Released September, 2012
Intel Core i3 3220
- 3.3 GHz
- Dual core
5.3 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Core i3 3220
| | Has a built-in GPU Yes | | Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm |
| | Higher clock speed 3.3 GHz | | More threads 4 |
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E8400 vs 3220 among desktop CPUs (45 to 75W)
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 | |
| Fire Strike | |
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? | |
| Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more | |
Value | |
Are you paying a premium for performance? | |
| Fire Strike, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more | |
| 5.3 | CPUBoss Score |
Combination of all six facets | |
 | Winner |
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 | 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 | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.22 GHz | vs | 3.43 GHz | Around 25% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
| Supports trusted computing | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Allows for safer, more reliable computing | |||
| Much higher Maximum operating temperature | 72.4 °C | vs | 65.3 °C | More than 10% higher Maximum operating temperature | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.23 GHz | vs | 3.46 GHz | More than 20% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
| |||||||
| Has a built-in GPU | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required | |||
| Much newer manufacturing process | 22 nm | vs | 45 nm | 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 | |||
| More threads | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many threads | |||
| Lower typical power consumption | 44.69W | vs | 52.81W | More than 15% lower typical power consumption | |||
| Newer | Sep, 2012 | vs | Jan, 2008 | Release date over 4 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 | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Duo E8400 vs Core i3 3220
CompuBench 1.5 (Bitcoin mining) Data courtesy CompuBench
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
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Core2 Duo E8400 | vs | Core i3 3220 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 3 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 | Yes | 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 | 1.83 pt/W | 2.69 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 52.81W | 44.69W | |
details | Core2 Duo E8400 | vs | Core i3 3220 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 nm | 22 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock multiplier | 9 | 33 | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 72.4°C | Unknown - 65.3°C | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclock popularity | 125 | 50 | |
| Overclocked clock speed | 4.22 GHz | 3.43 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.23 GHz | 3.46 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.22 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 E8400  Report a correction |  Intel Core i3 3220 Report a correction |
Desktops
Looking for a desktop?
- 5 desktops with the Intel Core2 Duo E8400, starting from $100
- 9 desktops with the Intel Core i3 3220, starting from $156
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $125 | $50 | |
| 3220 vs 5300 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $125 | ||
| 3220 vs Q6600 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $125 | $205 | |
| 3220 vs 2400 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $125 | $75 | |
| 3220 vs G2020 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $125 | $50 | |
| 3220 vs 5400K | ||
| | VS |  |
| $125 | $76 | |
| 3220 vs G2030 | ||
 | VS | |
| $145 | ||
| E8400 vs Q6600 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $305 | $300 | |
| W3520 vs 2500 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $272 | $350 | |
| 4790K vs 6700K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 4200U vs 6410 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| 3470 vs 5200 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $275 | $161 | |
| 4005U vs N3540 | ||
| | VS | |
| $125 | $50 | |
| 3220 vs 5300 | ||
Read more
Comments
Showing 2 comments.
