CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of T6400 vs D2550

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

Passmark and GeekBench (32-bit)

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

Passmark (Single Core)

Power Consumption

How much power does the processor require?

TDP

Features

How does CPUBoss rank the features of each product?

Features and specifications that differ between products

No winner declared

Too close to call

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 T6400

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core2 Duo T6400

Report a correction
Significantly more l2 cache 2 MB vs 1 MB 2x more l2 cache; more data can be stored in the l2 cache for quick access later
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes vs No Somewhat common; Allows for maximum performance when needed, while conserving power and minimizing heat production when not needed
Slightly higher clock speed 2 GHz vs 1.86 GHz Around 10% higher clock speed
Much more l2 cache per core 1 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core 2x more l2 cache per core
Better PassMark (Single core) score 770 vs 296 More than 2.5x better PassMark (Single core) score
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.12 GHz vs 1.87 GHz Around 15% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Slightly better performance per dollar 2.55 pt/$ vs 2.3 pt/$ More than 10% better performance per dollar
Slightly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2 GHz vs 1.87 GHz More than 5% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Atom D2550

Reasons to consider the
Intel Atom D2550

Report a correction
Has a built-in GPU Yes vs No Somewhat common; A separate graphics adapter is not required
Is hyperthreaded Yes vs No Somewhat common; Maximizes usage of each CPU core
Newer manufacturing process 32 nms vs 45 nms A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
Significantly lower typical power consumption 8.13W vs 28.44W 3.5x lower typical power consumption
More threads 4 vs 2 Twice as many threads
Marginally newer Mar, 2012 vs Jan, 2009 Release date over 3 years later
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 2.41 $/year vs 8.43 $/year 3.5x lower annual home energy cost

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core2 Duo T6400 vs Atom D2550

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core2 Duo T6400  vs
Atom D2550 
Clock speed 2 GHz 1.86 GHz
Cores Dual core Dual core
Is hyperthreaded No Yes

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Has vitualization support No No
Instruction-set-extensions
MMX
SSE
SSE3
SSE2
Supplemental SSE3
SSE4.1
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes No

gpu

GPU None GPU
Label N/A Integrated
Number of displays supported N/A 2
GPU clock speed N/A 640 MHz

bus

Architecture FSB DMI
Number of links 1 1

details

Core2 Duo T6400  vs
Atom D2550 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 2 4
L2 cache 2 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 1 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 45 nms 32 nms
Max CPUs 1 1
Voltage range 1 - 1.25V 0.91 - 1.21V

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.12 GHz 1.87 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2 GHz 1.87 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.12 GHz 1.87 GHz

power consumption

TDP 35W 10W
Annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year 2.41 $/year
Performance per watt 7.21 pt/W 10.82 pt/W
Typical power consumption 28.44W 8.13W
Intel Core2 Duo T6400
Report a correction
Intel Atom D2550
Report a correction

Comments

comments powered by Disqus