Winner
Intel Core2 Duo P7550
CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core2 Duo P7550 based on its performance and single-core performance.
See full details Intel Core2 Duo P7550 vs AMD E 300 |
Released July, 2009
Intel Core2 Duo P7550
- 2.26 GHz
- Dual core
5.1 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Intel Core2 Duo P7550
 | Much better 3DMark06 CPU score 2,050 | | Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score 92,300 MB/s |
| | Much more l2 cache 3 MB | | Much better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score 2,097 |
VS
Released August, 2011
AMD E 300
- 1.3 GHz
- Dual core
5.3 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the AMD E 300
| | Has a built-in GPU Yes | | Newer manufacturing process 40 nm |
| | Lower typical power consumption 14.63W | | Newer Aug, 2011 |
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of P7550 vs 300 among all CPUs
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 | |
| Sky Diver and Cloud Gate | |
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? | |
| Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, CompuBench 1.5 Bitcoin mining and 11 more | |
Value | |
Are you paying a premium for performance? | |
| Sky Diver, Cloud Gate, 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
Intel Core2 Duo P7550CPUBoss Winner |  | |
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Much better 3DMark06 CPU score | 2,050 | vs | 20.3 | Around 101x better 3DMark06 CPU score | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Much better geekbench 3 AES single core score | 92,300 MB/s | vs | 41,900 MB/s | Around 2.2x better geekbench 3 AES single core score | |||
| Much more l2 cache | 3 MB | vs | 1 MB | 3x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later | |||
| Much better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score | 2,097 | vs | 827 | More than 2.5x better geekbench 2 (32-bit) score | |||
| Significantly higher clock speed | 2.26 GHz | vs | 1.3 GHz | Around 75% higher clock speed | |||
| Much more l2 cache per core | 1.5 MB/core | vs | 0.5 MB/core | 3x more l2 cache per core | |||
| Better performance per watt | 3.81 pt/W | vs | 2.34 pt/W | Around 65% better performance per watt | |||
| |||||||
| Has a built-in GPU | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required | |||
| Newer manufacturing process | 40 nm | vs | 45 nm | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
| Lower typical power consumption | 14.63W | vs | 20.31W | Around 30% lower typical power consumption | |||
| Newer | Aug, 2011 | vs | Jul, 2009 | Release date over 2 years later | |||
| Lower annual home energy cost | 4.34 $/year | vs | 6.02 $/year | Around 30% lower annual home energy cost | |||
| Lower annual commercial energy cost | 15.77 $/year | vs | 21.9 $/year | Around 30% lower annual commercial energy cost | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Duo P7550 vs E 300
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 P7550 | vs | E 300 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 2.26 GHz | 1.3 GHz | |
| Cores | Dual core | Dual core | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction set extensions | |||
| SSE4a | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE | |||
| AMD64 | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| AMD-V | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
details | Core2 Duo P7550 | vs | E 300 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Threads | 2 | 2 | |
| L2 cache | 3 MB | 1 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 1.5 MB/core | 0.5 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 45 nm | 40 nm | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock multiplier | 8 | 5 | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 90°C | Unknown - 90°C | |
integrated graphics | |||
| GPU | None | GPU | |
| Label | N/A | Radeon™ HD 6310 | |
| Latest DirectX | N/A | 11.0 | |
| GPU clock speed | N/A | 488 MHz | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 25W | 18W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 6.02 $/year | 4.34 $/year | |
| Annual commercial energy cost | 21.9 $/year | 15.77 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 3.81 pt/W | 2.34 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 20.31W | 14.63W | |
 Intel Core2 Duo P7550  Report a correction |  AMD E 300 Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $125 | ||
| Intel Core i3 3220 vs AMD E 300 | ||
 | VS | |
| $107 | ||
| Intel Celeron N3050 vs AMD E 300 | ||
 | VS | |
| $225 | ||
| Intel Core i3 2328M vs AMD E 300 | ||
 | VS | |
| $105 | ||
| Intel Core i5 2430M vs AMD E 300 | ||
 | VS | |
| $75 | ||
| Intel Celeron 1005M vs AMD E 300 | ||
 | VS | |
| $250 | ||
| Intel Core i3 2367M vs AMD E 300 | ||
 | VS | |
| $225 | ||
| Intel Core i3 3217U vs AMD E 300 | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $300 | $305 | |
| Intel Core i5 2500 vs Xeon W3520 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| AMD A9 7th Gen A9-9410 vs Intel Core i5 6200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $350 | $272 | |
| Intel Core i7 6700K vs 4790K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| AMD A8 6410 vs Intel Core i5 4200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $180 | ||
| AMD A6 5200 vs Intel Core i5 3470 | ||
 | VS | |
| $50 | $125 | |
| AMD A4 5300 vs Intel Core i3 3220 | ||
 | VS |  |
| $161 | $275 | |
| Intel Pentium N3540 vs Core i3 4005U | ||
