Winner
Intel Core2 Duo E8400
CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core2 Duo E8400 based on its performance.
See full details Intel Core2 Duo E8400 vs E6400 |
Released January, 2008
Intel Core2 Duo E8400
- 3 GHz
- Dual core
2 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Intel Core2 Duo E8400
 | Much higher clock speed 3 GHz | | Much better PassMark score 2,160 |
| | Much better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score 2,826 | | Much newer manufacturing process 45 nm |
VS
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of E8400 vs E6400 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 | |
| 2 | 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 higher clock speed | 3 GHz | vs | 2.13 GHz | More than 40% higher clock speed | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much better PassMark score | 2,160 | vs | 1,295 | More than 65% better PassMark score | |||
| Much better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score | 2,826 | vs | 1,961 | Around 45% better geekbench 2 (32-bit) 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 | 3.33 GHz | More than 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 | 61.4 °C | Around 20% higher Maximum operating temperature | |||
| Much better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.23 GHz | vs | 3.33 GHz | More than 25% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
| Newer | Jan, 2008 | vs | Jul, 2006 | Release date over 1 years later | |||
| |||||||
| CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the E6400 vs the E8400. | |||||||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Duo E8400 vs E6400
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
GeekBench
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
PassMark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Core2 Duo E8400 | vs | E6400 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 3 GHz | 2.13 GHz | |
| Cores | Dual core | Dual core | |
| Socket type | |||
| LGA 775 | |||
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Supports trusted computing | Yes | No | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
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 | 1.83 pt/W | 1.35 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 52.81W | 52.81W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
| Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock speed | 1,333 MHz | 1,066 MHz | |
details | Core2 Duo E8400 | vs | E6400 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 2 | 2 | |
| L2 cache | 6 MB | 2 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 3 MB/core | 1 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 45 nm | 65 nm | |
| Transistor count | 410,000,000 | 167,000,000 | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock multiplier | 9 | 8 | |
| Voltage range | 0.85 - 1.36V | 0.85 - 1.5V | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 72.4°C | Unknown - 61.4°C | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclock popularity | 125 | 15 | |
| Overclocked clock speed | 4.22 GHz | 3.33 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.23 GHz | 3.33 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.22 GHz | 3.33 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 |  Intel Core2 Duo E6400 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $146 | ||
| E8400 vs Q6600 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $146 | $125 | |
| E8400 vs 3220 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $146 | $125 | |
| E8400 vs E7500 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $146 | $179 | |
| E8400 vs Q8400 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $146 | $64 | |
| E8400 vs E5700 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $146 | $200 | |
| E8400 vs Q9400 | ||
| | VS |  |
| $146 | $150 | |
| E8400 vs 2100 | ||
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 |  |
| $350 | ||
| 6700K vs 7th Gen A12-9700P | ||
| | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9420 | ||
