0 Comments
| Intel Core2 Duo E8400 vs E6750 |
Released January, 2008
Intel Core2 Duo E8400
- 3 GHz
- Dual core
Reasons to buy the Intel Core2 Duo E8400
![]() | Much newer manufacturing process 45 nm | ![]() | Higher clock speed 3 GHz |
![]() | Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) 4.22 GHz | ![]() | Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 4.23 GHz |
VS
Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
Much newer manufacturing process | 45 nm | vs | 65 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Higher clock speed | 3 GHz | vs | 2.66 GHz | Around 15% higher clock speed | |||
Much better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.22 GHz | vs | 3.67 GHz | Around 15% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.23 GHz | vs | 3.72 GHz | Around 15% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
| |||||||
CPUBoss is not aware of any important advantages of the E6750 vs the E8400. | |||||||
Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Duo E8400 vs E6750
GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Duo E8400
2,982
Core2 Duo E6750
2,565
GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Duo E8400
1,625
Core2 Duo E6750
1,410
GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Duo E8400
128,000 MB/s
Core2 Duo E6750
113,500 MB/s
GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Duo E8400
2,826
Core2 Duo E6750
2,458
GeekBench (64-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs
Core2 Duo E8400
3,092
Core2 Duo E6750
2,781
GeekBench
Core2 Duo E8400
4,794
Core2 Duo E6750
4,210
PassMark Data courtesy Passmark
Core2 Duo E8400
2,160
Core2 Duo E6750
1,721
PassMark (Single Core)
Core2 Duo E8400
1,251
Core2 Duo E6750
1,004
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Core2 Duo E8400 | vs | E6750 |
---|---|---|---|
Clock speed | 3 GHz | 2.66 GHz | |
Cores | Dual core | Dual core | |
Socket type | |||
LGA 775 | |||
features | |||
Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
Supports trusted computing | Yes | Yes | |
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 | 1.7 pt/W | |
Typical power consumption | 52.81W | 52.81W | |
bus | |||
Architecture | FSB | FSB | |
Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
Clock speed | 1,333 MHz | 1,333 MHz |
details | Core2 Duo E8400 | vs | E6750 |
---|---|---|---|
Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
Threads | 2 | 2 | |
L2 cache | 6 MB | 4 MB | |
L2 cache per core | 3 MB/core | 2 MB/core | |
Manufacture process | 45 nm | 65 nm | |
Transistor count | 410,000,000 | 291,000,000 | |
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 - 72°C | |
overclocking | |||
Overclock popularity | 125 | 30 | |
Overclocked clock speed | 4.22 GHz | 3.67 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 4.23 GHz | 3.72 GHz | |
Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 4.22 GHz | 3.67 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 Core2 Duo E6750 ![]() |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | ||
E8400 vs Q6600 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $125 | |
E8400 vs 3220 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $125 | |
E8400 vs E7500 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $64 | |
E8400 vs E5700 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $179 | |
E8400 vs Q8400 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | $200 | |
E8400 vs E8500 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$179 | ||
E8400 vs 250 | ||
Popular Comparisons
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$305 | $300 | |
W3520 vs 2500 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$272 | $350 | |
4790K vs 6700K | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
4200U vs 6410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$281 | ||
6200U vs 7th Gen A9-9410 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$275 | $161 | |
4005U vs N3540 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$248 | $230 | |
4770K vs 9590 | ||
![]() | VS | ![]() |
$250 | $350 | |
6600K vs 6700K | ||