CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of SU9400 vs 450 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

6.2

CPUBoss Score

Combination of all six facets

Winner
Intel Core2 Duo SU9400 

CPUBoss recommends the Intel Core2 Duo SU9400  based on its performance, single-core performance and power consumption.

See full details

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core2 Duo SU9400

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core2 Duo SU9400

Report a correction
Much better 3DMark06 CPU score 1,197 vs 18.4 More than 65x better 3DMark06 CPU 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 3 AES single core score 56,500 MB/s vs 53,200 MB/s More than 5% better geekbench 3 AES single core score
Much more l2 cache per core 1.5 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 3x more l2 cache per core
Significantly better performance per watt 5.97 pt/W vs 2.98 pt/W More than 2x better performance per watt
Lower typical power consumption 8.13W vs 14.63W Around 45% lower typical power consumption
Lower annual home energy cost 2.41 $/year vs 4.34 $/year Around 45% lower annual home energy cost
Lower annual commercial energy cost 8.76 $/year vs 15.77 $/year Around 45% lower annual commercial energy cost
Front view of AMD E 450

Reasons to consider the
AMD E 450

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Higher clock speed 1.65 GHz vs 1.4 GHz Around 20% higher clock speed
Newer manufacturing process 40 nm vs 45 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Newer Aug, 2011 vs Aug, 2008 Release date over 3 years later

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Duo SU9400 vs E 450

GeekBench 3 (Multi-core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

E 450
1,127

GeekBench 3 (Single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

GeekBench 3 (AES single core) Data courtesy Primate Labs

Core2 Duo SU9400
56,500 MB/s
E 450
53,200 MB/s

3D Mark 06 (CPU)

E 450
18.4

PassMark Data courtesy Passmark

PassMark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core2 Duo SU9400  vs
E 450 
Clock speed 1.4 GHz 1.65 GHz
Cores Dual core Dual core
Socket type
BGA 956
Super 7

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
SSE4a
SSE2
MMX
SSE3
SSE
AMD64
SSE4.1
AMD-V
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

bus

Clock speed 800 MHz 100 MHz

details

Core2 Duo SU9400  vs
E 450 
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 7 25

integrated graphics

GPU None GPU
Label N/A Radeon™ HD 6320
Latest DirectX N/A 11.0
GPU clock speed N/A 508 MHz
Turbo clock speed N/A 600 MHz

power consumption

TDP 10W 18W
Annual home energy cost 2.41 $/year 4.34 $/year
Annual commercial energy cost 8.76 $/year 15.77 $/year
Performance per watt 5.97 pt/W 2.98 pt/W
Typical power consumption 8.13W 14.63W
Intel Core2 Duo SU9400
Report a correction
AMD E 450
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus